au wy AA oe yn eas AAA a 


 epenesenner 


SD DPS Se Os 5 a TL 
> DIP : cee 


aA, Pe eS 


yD 
D> 
yd 
DD Pa 
ae 
pee> 
> 


Be ee ee te 
2) ee >> : 


TH >. OB 
ate >) 
~ pd 
>> PD 
>> 
D4 
Dp - ‘ 1a ) 
2 A ¢ Sp 
>> 
» 
oe? pees 


eee? AA 
Shae 
» 
2 
Dwi 
2D ~~ 79 


> Pye 
D> eet 
>>> 
>> 
BS > i 
DD? 
Dy) 
>> 
>»»d~ 
DD 
SD 2 
DD 
>>> 
Sp SP) 
D>» 
DD 
> 
Tas 


2 
pe: 
& 
» ~ ¥ ‘ 
a 
yp py eg 
\) 
> 

Dy 
i Pun 
D>? 


> pw ee 


oe Dw 
>. D> 

Set 
oie 
ee 


ye De 


SD. 


>> 12> 


% p —— < 
») 
y; 

2D 

> 

Dy? 


RES eR AaAr AA AAAAA AONE COS 

aahrannce so no AAW ANRARA RA A 

Aca nenie Nee PRS BS Aannnnanannarans? 
@ , . ; ‘& af \ i el 
hey AAAAA nA AAAAAA NARA AA 
LAARANANA es ice A 


A a pere TARR ans 

Y ADAP AAG al JN - AWnnnnadinnnianh NAR 

arse mer | 

ANA ha Date eae a 

| PARRA Aan RARAAAA Ray, 
Anan a ans Ap 

rN Manan en A An 


lal MAAANAARAN »: 


sae 59 Lid: 


>> 22> 
> 22 

> 22 

D> 


>» WPI 
we oe 


> 22D w 


—» >» DD 


N 
ip 
A 


>») >>> yp 
2>2> 
= 
» 
2 D> 
22> D> - 
De. s 
Ss 
ID 


ec 


Sys 
=>) 
Soy. 
aD ee > 
YDS oe, 
ns 
we Ns 
» om ye 
2 


Ky Jud 7 ee a 
Yb bur, ry: se OWN. 


By OWDOM Sion a. 
Rad 


California Academy of Sciences 


RECEIVED. BY PURCHASE 


202371 | 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2012 with funding from 
California Academy of Sciences Library 


http://archive.org/details/Zoologist24/Slond 


Pee AOOQOLOGIST: 


— 


A MONTHLY JOURNAL 


MATURAL’ HISTORY. 


FOURTH SERIES.—VOL. IV. 


EDITED BY 


po OW. Ee DIS PANS. 
2 


eee 


4 LONDON : 


WEST, NEWMAN, & CO., 54, HATTON GARDEN. 
SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, & CO., Lrp. 


1900. 


2 
Gawd 
97— 5 
4 


oe 
Boek 
N Yate os 
: fF 
te 
- (en i) | 
¥, 5 i ! : 
) @e)- AN 
Se 
Ue 0 
j 
Oy. 


PREFACE. 


Wir the December issue ‘ Tue Zoonoaistr’ has reached the end of 
the nineteenth century, and has completed its fifty-eighth volume. It 
is interesting to glance at the status of Zoology when this Journal — 
was founded by Edward Newman in 18438, and its progress since. 

The Zoological Society had been founded in 1826, and was thus in 
only the seventeenth year of its existence ; the Entomological Society 
was but ten years old. The Ray Society was not started till the 
following year (1844), and is therefore one year younger than ‘ THE 
Zootoaist.’ In the year that ‘Tue Zoonoaisr’ first appeared there 
was published the concluding volume on the Zoology of the Voyage 
of H.M.S§. ‘ Beagle,’ the vessel in which Darwin made his celebrated 
voyage. Lyell was steadily preparing his ‘Travels in North America,’ 
which was published in the early part of 1845. May, 1848, is the 
published date of the eighteenth and last part of Agassiz’ monumental 
work, ‘ Recherches sur les Poissons fossiles.’’ In the same year the 
Rey. W. Kirby was still alive, and a sixth edition (vols. i. and ii.) of 
his immortal ‘ Introduction,’ with the addition of one hundred MS. 
pages of new matter, was published. Frank Buckland was at Win- 
chester College with heart set on becoming a surgeon. Huxley was 
a student winning prizes. Hight months of this year were occupied 
by Audubon in his Missouri River journey in the interest of the 
‘Quadrupeds of North America.’ The British Museum was under 
the influence of Panizzi, who this year inaugurated his extensive 
reforms in the Printed Library. In the epochs of this institution we 
can pass, according to our purview, from the acquisition of the Mantell 
Fossils in 1889 to that of the Croizet Fossil-Mammals in 1848. 
Bloomsbury was then the home of literature. In 1848 Catesby also 
completed his ‘ Natural History of Carolina, Florida, and the Bahama 
Islands,’ a pioneer work, now seldom consulted amidst the ever 
increasing literature of North American biology. ‘The voyages of the 
‘Erebus’ and ‘Terror,’ rich in zoological results, terminated this year ; 
John Gould was publishing his magnificent ornithological publications, 
and in 1843 Lovell Reeve commenced to issue his ‘ Conchologia 
Iconica.’ In this year was also finished the Second Series of Jardine 


1V PREFACE. 


and Selby’s ‘Illustrations of Ornithology,’ while Macgillivray and 
Yarrell were publishing their works, which will be remembered and 
consulted as long as naturalists feel an interest in British Birds. 

How much has transpired since then, which now almost reads as 
ancient history! In 1847 Hooker started for India on his memorable 
journey, which ultimately produced the well-read ‘ Himalayan Journals.’ 
In 1848 Bates left England for Para, and the narrative of ‘The 
Naturalist on the Amazons’ may be said to have commenced. 1854 
found Wallace at Singapore, and from that day the biological story of 
‘The Malay Archipelago’ has been told, followed, andimitated. In 1848 
South Africa was little known, and its Mammalia to be found in vast 
herds by those who could penetrate the country. To-day the country is 
open, but the Mammalia a vanishing quantity. Délegorgue completed 
his journey—known to all naturalists—in 1844 ; the conclusion of the 
zoological results of Sir Andrew Smith's expedition appeared in 1849 ; 
Gordon Cumming did not tell his wonderful tale of the wild life of 
the veld till 1850, before Mauch and Holub inaugurated the new era. 
Central Africa was marked ‘ desert,’’ at least on school maps; to-day 
we tabulate its fauna, and read Emin Pasha. And, last of all, with 
national pride, we may refer to the Voyage of the ‘ Challenger,’ and 
the volumes devoted to its zoological results. 

But, greater than all, is the difference in our philosophical con- 
ception of the teachings of Biology. In 1859 Darwin published his 
‘Origin of Species,’ and from that date modern biology will recognise 
the commencement of a new period. Asin San Francisco, it is said, 
everything dates back to 1849, so our present zoological conceptions 
take birth from 1859. 

Of the contributors to our first number probably J. W. Douglas is 
now the only survivor. The aims and scope of the publication are 
precisely the same as in 1848—bionomic primarily. In philosophy 
there is great change, but no new creed. It is undoubtedly the case 
that a naturalist may exist without being an evolutionist ; it is equally 
true that evolutionists can be found who are neither Lamarckians nor 
Darwinists ; and it is certain that Darwinists are to be found in plenty 
who are quite outside the school of neo-Darwinism, and who have no 
desire to risk wrecking a great conception on speculative side issues. 
Hence ‘Tue Zoonocisr’ welcomes all phases of thought, but stipulates 
for facts rather than theories, argument more than advocacy. All 
contributors may at least speculate on what our Journal may be made 
for the cause of Zoology during the next century. The summing up 
will then be in other hands. 


CONTENTS. 


we 


ALPHABETICAL LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS. 


APLIN, O. V., F.L.S., M.B.O.U. 
Notes on the Ornithology of Oxford- 
shire (1896-1898), 11; Nesting 
habits of the Great Tit, 143; 
The Birds of Lleyn, West Car- 
narvonshire, 489; The Sardinian 
Warbler, 518; The origin and 
meaning of the names of British 
Birds, 558 
ARNOLD, E. C. 
Pectoral Sandpiper at Aldeburgh, 
521 
BANKES, A. 
Number of eggs in nest of Swift, 
556 
Barine, A. H. 
Black Rat in Forfarshire, 517 
BaRRETT-Hamiuton, G. E. H. 
Birds singing during a thunder- 
storm, 188 
Benson, Rev. Coarues W., LL.D. 
Birds on the Rigi, 268 
BuatHwayt, F. L. 
Pied Flycatcher in Somersetshire, 
237; A visit to Lundy, 375 
Bonuorts, J. L. 
On the moult and colour changes 
ofthe Corncrake (Crex pratensis), 
29 
BrRockHOoLEs, W. FitzHERBERT 
Curious partnership of Hedge- 
Sparrow and Blackbird in a 
nest, 237 
Brown, J. A. HARVIE- 
Albatross near Faroe, 324; Wild 
Cat, 477 
BRYANT, CHARLES H. - 
Black Redstart at Brighton, 37 
BuckKNILL, JouHn A. 
Mammalia of Surrey, 559 
Burr, Maucotm 
Land Birds at sea, 144 
mortar, A, G., Ph.D., F.L.S., F.2Z.8. 
On sexual differences in the wing 


of the House-Sparrow (Passer 
domesticus), 74 
Butter, EH. A., Lieut.-Col. 
Black-game in Suffolk, 39 
BUTTERFIELD, H. P. 

Ornithological notes from the Wils- 

den District (Yorkshire), 482 
BUTTERFIELD, W. RUSKIN 

Occurrence of the Melodious War- 
bler in Sussex, 518; Great Skua 
(Megalestris catarrhactes) in 
Kent, 521 

CarRTER, THOMAS 

Notes from Point Cloates, North- 

west Australia, 416 
CLARKE, W. J. 
Levantine Shearwaters at Scar- 
borough, 521 
Cooper, T. TERRY 
Marsh-Harrier in Berkshire, 143 
CorBiIn, G. B’ 

The Pike and its prey, 282; Early 
appearance of Swift, 8321; Hoo- 
poe in Hants and Dorset, 322; 
Hybrid Pheasant, 323 

Cowaprp, T. A. 
Hoopoe in Anglesea, 82 
CrawsHay, RicHARD 
Curlew at sea, 483 
DAvENPoRT, H. 8. 
Nesting habits of the Sparrow- 
Hawk, 426 
Day, Rev. A. F., 8.J. 
Tameness of unmolested birds, 280 
DrGEN, Ep. 
On sexual differences in the feather- 
ing of the wing, 249 
DELVES, WILLIAM, Jun. 
Karly appearance of Chiffchaff, 148 
Distant, W. L. 

Serrated claws of the Common 
Heron, 388; Biological Sugges- 
tions—Mimicry, 116, 554; Mol- 
luses eaten by Wood-Pigeons, 484 


vi CONTENTS. 


Dosir, W. HENRY 


The Little Owl in North Wales (?), | 


556 
Ewuiott, J. STEELE- 

Lesser Shrew in Worcestershire, 
142; Nesting of the Great Tit 
(Parus major), 423; Nesting of 
the Common Sparrow (Passer 
domesticus), 424; Nesting habits 
ofthe Starling (Sturnus vulgaris), 
425; Some notes on the Swift 
(Cypselus apus), 479 

Farman, LAst 
Winter notes from Haddiscoe, 83 
Fitcu, Epwarp A., F.L.S., F.E.S. 

The Lesser Rorqual in the Essex 

Blackwater, 517 
Forrest, H. E. 

The movements of Starlings, 181, 
479; Curious variety of the 
Mole, 142; Great Tit nesting in 
active Bee-hive, 143; Nesting of 
the Hobby in Shropshire, 143, 
382; Sea-Lamprey at Shrews- 
bury, 144; Lesser Shrew in 
Shropshire, 186; Little Crake 
in Shropshire, 280; The Little 
Owl in Flintshire ?, 482; Verte- 
brate Fauna of North Wales, 
485; Breeding of the Tufted 
Duck (Fuligula cristata) in Shrop- 
shire, 506 

Fow ter, W. WarRDE, M.A. 
Lateness in appearance of the 
summer migrants, 238 
Fox, W. Storrs, M.A., F.Z.S. 
The Ring-Ouzel in Derbyshire, 1 
FrRouAwk, F. W. 

Little Gull (Larus minutus) on the 

Thames, 83 
GAYTHORPE, HARPER 

Strange hibernating quarters for 

Vanessa io and V. urtice, 559 
GRABHAM, Oxutey, M.A., M.B.O.U. 

Varieties of the Mole, 186; Water 
Shrews, 186; Natural History 
notes from Yorkshire for 1899, 
229; Number of eggs in nest of 
Swift, 520 

Grant, C.-L. B. 

Water Shrews taken three miles 

from water, 142 
(GURNEY, Js, M18. BeZeS. 

Ornithological Notes from Norfolk 
for 1899, 97; A short history of 
the Bearded Titmouse, 358 

Haiau, G. H. Caton 


Bird notes from North-east Lin- | 


colnshire during the autumn 
migration of 1899, 201 
Har, HOS: 

Nesting of the Marsh-Warbler in 

Wiltshire, 555 
Hau, RoBEeRtT 

Sea-Elephants on 

Land, 441 
HOoRSBRUGH, CHARLES B. 

Mistle-Thrush laying twice in the 
same nest, 422; Gannet in Som- 
ersetshire, 557 

Howarp, H. E. 

Unusual numbers of Green Plover 
in Worcestershire, 187; Varia- 
tions in the notes and songs of 
birds in different districts, 882 

Howaprp, R. J. 
Wild Cat, 555 
JONES, Surgeon K. Huruston#, M.B., 
R.N., F.L.8 

Land birds at sea, 51; Ornithologi- 
cal notes from South-Western 
Europe, 448 

JOURDAIN, Francis C. R. 
Rough notes on Derbyshire Orni- 
thology (1899-1900), 428 
Kew, Watuis H. 
Spinning Molluscs, 289 
LANGDALE, H. MARMADUKE 

Molluses eaten by Wood-Pigeons, © 

484 
LEIGHTON, GERALD, M.B. 

The Adder-swallowing theory from 
an anatomical point of view, 
393; British Snakes, 560 

LEWIS, STANLEY 

Serrated claws of the Common 
Heron, 388; Mistle-Thrush at- 
tacking Squirrel, 321 

LYDEKKER, R., F.R.S., F.G.S., F.Z.8. 

Specimens of Harvest-Mouse and 
British Bats wanted for the Na- 
tional Museum, 321 

MacpHERSON, Rev. H. A., M.A. 

The Bearded Tit—a correction cor- 
rected, 478; Is the Siskin an 
autumn and winter songster ?, 
555; The names of British Birds, 
558 

MARCHANT, SPENCER H. LE 

Curlew nesting in Surrey, 382 

MARSHALL, Guy A. K., F.Z.S. 

‘* Assimilative Colouration,’’ 827; 
Conscious Protective Resem- 
blance, 536 

Martin, Basin W. 
Red-billed Chough near Hendon; 


Kerguelen’s 


CONTENTS. 


82; Cuckoo breeding in London 
District, 481 
MrapzE-WaA po, E. G. B. 
The Little Owl, 556 
MEIKLEJOHN, A. H. 

How does the Cuckoo carry her 
ege ?, 262; Note on the nesting 
habits of the Sparrow-Hawk, 
381; The origin and meaning of 
the names of British Birds, 511; 
The mode of progression of the 
Phalacrocoracide under water, 
557 

Morey, JOHN 
Bittern near Scarborough, 83 
Murray, H. W., F.Z.S. 
Mammalia of Surrey, 559 
Netson, H. T. 

Red-crested Pochard in Yorkshire, 
488; Stone Curlew in Cleveland 
in winter, 483; Marten in Cleve- 
land, 517 

New, OLiver H. 

Great Spotted Woodpecker (Den- 

drocopus major), 278 
NosBue, HEATLEY 

** Chiffchaff building on the top of 
small yew and box trees ”—cor- 
rection, 87; Black-game in Suf- 
folk, 89; Lesser Shrew and Bank 
Vole in Berks, 421; The Bearded 
Titmouse and other birds in Nor- 
folk, 422 

Opp1, Count Errorr ARRIGONI DEGLI 

Notes upon the Zoological Meeting 

of Pavia, 265 
OLDHAM, CHARLES 

Lesser Shrew in Cambridgeshire, 
4921; Insectivorous habits of the 
Long-tailed Field-Mouse, 421; 
Quail in Cheshire, 428 

PATTEN, CHARLES J., B.A., M.D., &c. 

On the distribution of some birds 
observed in Ireland and in Switz- 
erland, 213 

PaTTERSON, ARTHUR 

The Birds of Great Yarmouth and 
the neighbourhood, 158, 397, 529; 
Cormorant in captivity, 240; 
Notes from Great Yarmouth, 241; 
Spoonbill at Great Yarmouth, 
323; Migration notes from Great 
Yarmouth, 324; Sunfish in the 
Yarmouth Roads, 483; Meristic 
Variation in the Edible Crab, 
484 

PLAYNE, HERBERT C. 

Blackcap in March, 187 


vii 


Pocotn; K.-1. 

Rare English Ticks, 326; Hybrid 
Dog and Fox, 477; Marine Cen- 
tipede in Somerset, 484 

PouttTon, Epwarp B., M.A.,F.R.S.,&c. 

Conscious Protective Resemblance, 

- 550 

RamspotHamM, R. H. 

Flycatcher feeding on worms, 278; 

Crossbills at Shrewsbury, 321 
READ, Ropert H. 

Nesting of the Common Sparrow 
(Passer domesticus), 519; Cuc- 
koo’s egg in Song-Thrush’s nest, 
520 

RENSHAW, GRAHAM 

Hquus quagga, L., 186; Hard-sat 

eges—a suggestion, 189 
RIDsDALE, BE. L. J. 

The Bearded Titmouse—a corree- 

tion, 422 
Rope, G. T. 

Remarks relating to mimicry, 85; 

Oared Shrew in Suffolk, 477 
RUSSELL, HAROLD 

The Great Spotted Woodpecker in 
Surrey, 322; Rooks in London, 
519 

SALPERS Ji EL., D.we: 

Ornithological notes from Mid- 

Wales, 76 
SAUNDERS, HOWARD 

Serrated claws of the Common 

Heron, 85 
Saxspy, T. EDMoNDSTON 

Ornithological notes from Shetland, 
281; Cuckoo in the Shetlands, 
426; Opah at the Shetlands, 484 

SELousS, EDMUND 

An observational diary of the habits 
of the Great Plover (didicnemus 
crepitans) during September and 
October, 173, 270, 458 

SERVICE, RoBERT 
Hybrid Doves, 281 
Souzr, D. tz, C.M.Z.S8., &e. 

‘‘ How does the new-born Kangaroo 
get into the mother’s pouch ?, 
49 


SOUTHWELL, THomas, F.Z.S. 

Notes on the Seal and Whale Fish- 
ery (1899), 65; Notes from Nor- 
folk, 239 

STARES, JOHN 

Black-tailed Godwit (Limosa bel- 

gica) in Hants, 428 
STEAD, Davin G. 
Zoological notes from Sydney, 345 


Vili 


Terry, F. W. 
Rana temporaria in the Scilly Is- 
lands, 383 
TrceHurstT, N. F., M.A., F.Z.S., &e. 
Some remarks on the birds seen 
in the south-east part of the 
mainland of Orkney in October, 
1899, 54; Occurrence of the 
Water Pipit (Anthus spipoletta) 
in Sussex, 278; Breeding of the 
Shoveler (Spatula clypeata) in 
Kent, 279; Breeding of the Gar- 
ganey (Querquedula circia) in 
Kent, 279 
Tuck, Rev. JuLIAN G., M.A. 
Nesting habits of Great Tit, 82; 
Great Grey Shrike in Suffolk, 
82; Peregrine in Suffolk, 83; 
Nesting notes, 239; Pectoral 
Sandpiper in Suffolk, 557 
VauGuHaNn, Lieut. Ropert E., R.N. 
Land birds at sea, 256 
WaRNER, W. H. 
Lesser Shrew and Bank Vole in 
Berks, 381 
WARREN, ROBERT 
Rose-coloured Starling in Co. Mayo, 
37; Bewick’s Swan in Moy KHs- 
tuary, 89; Golden Plover and 
Lapwings in Moy Estuary, 40, 


CONTENTS. 


144; Fox Shark (incorrectly Blue 
Shark, p. 40) in Killala Bay, Co. 
Mayo, 188; Wild Swans in 
North Treland: 187 

WESTELL, W. PERCIVALL 

Common Buzzard (Buteo vulgaris) 
shot in Hertfordshire, 426; Quail 
in Hertfordshire, 428 

WHITAKER, J. 

Albino Stoat in Lincolnshire, 517 ; 
Partridges in Nottinghamshire, 
521; Early Jack Snipe, 557 

WILLIAMS, W. J. 

Early appearance of Chiffchaff, 82 ; 
On the distribution of some birds 
observed in Ireland and in Switz- 
erland, 2138 

WILson, WILLIAM 

The Rook (Corvus frugilegus) in 
Scotland, 87; Bleater Snipes 
(Gallinago ccelestis) near Aber- 
deen, 187; Observations on birds 
during the exceptional severe 
spring in Aberdeen, 238 ; Obser- 
vations on the Cuckoo in Aber- 
deen, 481 

WITCHELL, CHARLES A. 

Stray notes on mimicry, 82, 145 
YERBURY, Col. J. W. 

Enemies of the Cicadide, 559 


CONTENTS. 1X 


ALPHABETICAL LIST OF SUBJECTS. 


Aberdeen, birds during the severe 
spring, 238 

Acanthis cannabina, 405 ; flavirostris, 
405; linaria, 405; rufescens, 405 

Acanthiza pyrrhopygia, 419 

Accentor collaris, 400; modularis, 
204, 237, 400, 451 

Accipenser latirostris, 241; sturio, 288 

Accipiter major, 215; nisus, 209, 215, 
381, 412, 426 

Acredula caudata, 220, 400 

Acrocephalus phragmitis, 204, 399, 
450; palustris, 555; streperus, 399 

Adder-swallowing theory from an ana- 


tomical point of view, 393; fig., 395 | 
Aigialitis hiaticula, 61; melanops, | 


418; ruficapilla, 419 

AXgotheles nove-hollandiz, 419 

Aipyornis maximus, egg, 48 

Ageronia feronica, 547, 554 

Alaba picta, 315 

Alauda arborea, 408; arvensis, 56, 
144, 208, 221, 249, 408, 453; brachy- 
dactyla, 408, 453 

Albatross near Faroe, 324 

Albino Stoat, 517 

Alea torda, 377, 457, 546 

Alcedo ispida, 208, 225, 409, 454 

Alopecias vulpes, 188 

Alyceeus, 305 

Ampelis garrula, 403 

Amphipeplea (Limnza) glutinosa, 
296, 297 

Anas boseas, 58, 209, 455, 5380; stre- 
pera, 530 

Ancylus, 297, 298; fluviatilis, 297; 
lacustris, 298, 320 

Anguilla australis, 848 

Annelida, 349 

Anous stolidus, 256 

Anser albifrons, 415; brachyrhyn- 
chus, 415; cinereus, 415; segetum, 
415 

Ant and larval Grasshopper, 354 

Antarctic Expedition, Scottish Na- 
tional, 344 

Anthropologists’ Congress, German, 
528 

Anthus australis, 417; campestris, 
402; obscurus, 55, 206, 402; pra- 
tensis, 52, 55, 205, 402, 451; rich- 


ardi, 402; rupestris, 402; sp., 52; 
spipoletta, 278; trivialis, 205, 402 
Anser brachyrhynchus, 209 
Apes and Man, relation between, 528 
Aplysia, 354 
Ardea cinerea, 38, 58, 85, 209, 413, 
455; pacifica, 419; purpurea, 413; 
ralloides, 414; russata, 124 
Ardeidz, 85 
Ardetta minuta, 414 


| Arionids, 289 


Ascaris megalocephala, 341 

Asilide, 559 

Asio accipitrinus, 208, 216, 410 ; otus, 
208, 410, 434 

Aspidobranchiata, 303 

Astur palumbarius, 412 

Athene noctua, 410 


_ Auk, Great, sale of eggs, 343 


| Balenoptera rostrata, 517 
| Balea perversa, 292 


Barleeia rubra, 309 

Barringtonia cupania, 850, 351 

Belostomatide, egg-carrying habits 
of certain, 93 

Bernicla brenta, 58, 529; leucopsis, 
529; ruficollis, 167, 415 

Biological Suggestions—Mimicry, 38, 
85, 116, 145, 287, 327, 536 

Birds, land, at sea, 51, 144, 256; of 
South-east Orkney mainland, 54; 
Humming, 93; Wild, Protection 
Acts, order under, 94; of Great 
Yarmouth and neighbourhood, 158, 
397, 529; of Horsey, sale prices of, 
168; singing during thunderstorm, 
188; notes from N.E. Lincolnshire, 
201; observed in Ireland and in 
Switzerland, 2183; in Aberdeen 
during the severe spring, 238; 
why do they settle on ships?, 260; 
on the Rigi, 268; tameness of un- 
molested, 280; great, of the South- 
ern Seas, 287; of Lundy, 375; 
variations in notes and songs of, 
382; of Point Cloates, N. W. Aus- 
tralia, 416; changed feeding habits 
in, 488; of Lleyn, West Carnar- 
vonshire, 489; British, origin and 
meaning of names of, 511, 558 


xX 


CONTENTS. 


Bittern near Scarborough, 83 
Bittium (Cerithium) reticulatum, 317 
Blackbird on the Rigi, 268; breeding 


in Shetland, 281 


Blackbird and Hedge-Sparrow, cur- 


ious partnership of, in a nest, 237 


Blackeap in March, 187 

Black-game in Suffolk and Norfolk, 39 
Bombinator igneus, 86, 145 

Booxs NoriceD :— 


An Account of the Deep-Sea 
Brachyura, and a Descriptive 
Catalogue of the Indian Deep- 
Sea Fishes collected by the 
Royal Indian Marine Ship ‘ In- 
vestigator,’ by A. Alcock, 42 


The Rainbow Trout, by Charles | 


Edward Walker and Charles S. 
Patterson, 43 


Our Rarer British Breeding Birds, | 


by R. Kearton, 44 

Die Fledermiiuse des Berliner Mu- 
seums fiir Naturkunde: 1 Lie- 
feriing, Die Megachiroptera, by 
Paul Matschie, 45 

A First Book in Organic Evolution, 
by D. Kerfoot Shute, 87 

Fifteen Years’ Sport and Life in 
the Hunting Grounds of Western 
America and British Columbia, 
by W. A. Baillie-Grohman, 88 

British Dragonflies (Odonata), by 
W. J. Lucas, 89 

Recent Foraminifera, a Descriptive 
Catalogue of Specimens dredged 
by the U.S. Fish Com. Steamer 
‘ Albatross,’ by James N. Flint, 
90 

The Mycetozoa, and some Ques- 
tions which they Suggest, by 
Sir Edward and Agnes Fry, 91 

Biologia Animale (Zoologia Gene- 
rale e Speciale) per Naturalisti, 
Medici, e Veterinari, Del Dott. 
Gedeone Collamarini, 92 

Faune de France—Les Oiseaux, 
par A. Acloque, 92 

The Races of Man, an Outline of 
Anthropology and Ethnography, 
by J. Deniker, 146 

A Book of Whales, by F. HE. Bed- 
dard, 147 

British Birds, with some Notes in 
reference to their Plumage, by 
Claude W. Wyatt, 148 

A Manual of Zoology, by the late 
T. Jeffery Parker and William 
A. Haswell, 149 


] 


The Caroline Islands, by F. W. 
Christian, 150 
The Vertebrate Fauna of Bedford- 
shire, by J. Steele Elliott, 152 
Transactions of the Caradoc and 
Severn Valley Field Club, 152 
A Monograph of Christmas Island 
(Indian Ocean), by Charles W. 
Andrews, &e., 190 

The Atoll of Funafuti, Ellice Group 
—its Zoology, Botany, Ethno- 
logy, and General Structure, 191 

The Norwegian North Polar Ex- 
pedition, 1893-1896, edited by 
Fridtjof Nansen, 192 

Text-Book on Paleontology, by 
Karl A von Zittel, 194 

An Elementary Course of Practical 
Zoology, by the late T. Jeffery 
Parker and W. N. Parker, 195 

General Index to Miss Ormerod’s 
Reports on Injurious Insects, 196 

Report of Injurious Insects and 
Common Farm Pests during the 
year 1899, with Methods of Pre- 
vention and Remedy, by Eleanor 
A. Ormerod, 196 

Ghizeh Zoological Gardens Report 
for 1899, by Stanley S. Flower, 
198 

A Key to the Birds of Australia‘and 
Tasmania, by Robert Hall, 199 

Animal Behaviour, by C. O. Whit- 
man, 199 

List of the Birds of Aberystwyth 
and Neighbourhood, by J. H. 
Salter, 200 

Naturalists’ Directory, 200 

A Treatise on Zoology, edited by 
EK. Ray Lankester, Part III., the 
Echinoderma, by F'. A. Bather, 
assisted by J. W. Gregory and 
E. 8. Goodrich, 242 

Sexual Dimorphism in the Animal 
Kingdom, a Theory of the Evo- 
lution of ‘Secondary’ Sexual 
Characters, by J. T. Cunning- 
ham, 243 

Evolution, by Frank B. Jevons, 244 

The Game Birds and Wild Fowl 
of the British Islands, by Charles 
Dixon, 246 

An Introduction to Science, by A. 
Hill, 247 

Ethnology, by Michael Haberlandt, 
247 

Illustrated Annual of Microscopy, 
247 


CONTENTS. x1 


The Birds of South Africa, by 
Arthur C. Stark, 283 
Catalogue of the Arctiade (Nolin, 
Lithosianz) in the Collection of 
the British Museum, by Sir 
George F. Hampson, 284 
Descriptive Guide to the Collection 
of Corals on view at the South 
London Art Gallery, 285 
The Birds of Surrey, by John A. 
Bucknill, 335 
The Birds of Cheshire, by T. A. 
Coward and Charles Oldham, 336 
Nature in Downland, by W. H. 
Hudson, 337 
Recollections of my Life, by Sur- 
geon-General Sir Joseph Fayrer, 
Bart., 3838 
Text-Book of Zoology, treated from 
a Biological Standpoint, by Dr. 
Otto Schmeil, 384 
Introduction to Zoology, by Charles 
Benedict Davenport and Ger- 
- trude Crotty Davenport, 385 
In Bird-land with Field-glass and 
Camera, by Oliver G. Pike, 386 
Bird Gods, by Charles de Kay, 387 
Year-Book of the United States 
Department of Agriculture, 1899, 
435 
Bulletin of the United States Fish 
Commission, 436 
The Birds of Ireland, by Richard 
J. Ussher and Robert Warren, 
486 
Fancy Waterfowl, by Frank Finn, 
487 
Church Stretton, by E. 8S. Cor- 
bold, F. B. Newnham, and R. A. 
Buddicom, edited by C. W. 
Campbell-Hyslop, 488 
Life and Letters of Thomas Henry 
Huxley, by his Son, Leonard 
Huxley, 522 
A Treatise on Zoology, edited by 
E. Ray Lankester, Part II., by 
EK. A. Minchin, Herbert Fowler, 
and Gilbert C. Bourne, with an 
Introduction by E. Ray Lankes- 
ter, 524 
Origin and Character of the British 
People, by Nottidge Charles Mac- 
namara, 525 
Bombyxinus, 311; 
ell: Uva, oll 
Botaurus stellaris, 83, 414 
Breeding of Jay in Oxfordshire, 19 ; 
haunts of Kite in Mid-Wales, 76, 


melanostoma, 


79; of Black-headed Gull in York- 
shire, 2831; of Shoveler in Kent, 
279; of Garganey in Kent, 279; 
of Blackbird in Shetland, 281; of 
Cuckoo in London, 488, 4389, 481; 
of Tufted Duck in Shropshire, 506 

British Association (Zoology), 527 

Bryozoa, 350 

Bulla (Philine) aperta, 301 

Bullfinch on the Rigi, 268 

Buphaga erythrorhyncha, 4388 

Bustard, Great, re-introduction in 
Norfolk, 489; Little, correction re- 
specting, 115 

Buteo lagopus, 209; vulgaris, 209, 
216, 878, 411, 426, 454 

Buzzard, Common, shot in Hertford- 
shire, 426 

Bythinia, 310; tentaculata, 310 

Bythiniz, 310 


Caceabis rufa, 584 

Calearius lapponicus, 406 

Calidris arenaria, 211 

Callianassa, 348 

Callionymus curvicornis, 354 

Cancer pagurus, 287, 484 

Canis lateralis, 543 

Caprimulgus europeus, 409 

Carduelis elegans, 206, 222, 404, 482, 
452 

Carine noctua, 482, 556 

Cat, Wild, 477, 555 

Cattle, White, 286 

Centipede, marine, in Somerset, 484 

Cerithidea decoilata, 818; obtusa 
(Cerithium truncatum, C. obtu- 
sum), 317, 320 

Cerithiidz, 316 

Cerithiopsis tubercularis, 805, 817 

Certhia familiaris, 219, 401 

Cestoda, 840 

Chaffinch on the Rigi, 268 

Charadrius pluvialis, 40, 60, 210 

Charearias glaucus (see Alopecias 
vulpes, 188) 

Charybis cruciatus, 354 

Chasmagnathus levis, 348 

Chelidon urbica, 206, 224, 258, 408, 
452 

Chifichaff, building of, 87 ; early ap- 
pearance, 82, 143; on the Rigi, 268 

Chondropoma (Cyclostoma), 307, 308; 
dentatum, 307, 820; plicatulum, 307 

Chough, Alpine, on the Rigi, 269; 
Red-billed, near Hendon, 82 

Chromodoris (Doris) amabilis, 802 

Chrysolopus spectabilis, 347 


Xli CONTENTS. 


Chrysomitris spinus, 222, 404, 555 

Cicada, 345; angularis, 347 

Cicadide, 547; enemies of, 559 

Ciconia alba, 226, 414; nigra, 414 

Cincloramphus cruralis, 417; rufes- 
cens, 417 

Cinclus aquaticus, 217, 400; melano- 
gaster, 400 

Circus eruginosus, 105, 148, 411, 423; 
assimilis, 417; cinerascens, 411; 
cyaneus, 411 

Cistula (Adamsiella) aripensis, 306 ; 
lineolata, 306 

Clangula albeola, 532; glaucion, 532 

Clausilia, 292; laminata, 291; rol- 
phii, 291; rugosa var. dubia, 292 

Clausiliz, 292 

Claws, serrated, of Common Heron, 
38, 85 

Cnidoglanis megastoma, 356 

Coccothraustes vulgaris, 404, 432 

Coccystes glandarius, 410 

Cochlicopa lubrica, 291 

Colouration, Assimilative, 3827 

Columba wnas, 210, 584; livia, 59, 
455; palumbus, 225, 455, 533 

Colymbide, 557 

Colymbus glacialis, 80 

Coracias garrulus, 409 

Cormorant in Oxfordshire, 25; in 
captivity, 240 

Corncrake, moult and colour-changes 
of, 29 

Corvus australis, 417; corax, 378, 
407, 453; cornix, 52, 57, 207, 879, 
407; corone, 207, 879, 407, 458; 
frugilegus, 37, 57, 208, 379, 408, 
519; monecula, 56; monedula, 207, 
379, 407 

Cotile riparia, 52, 258, 403 ; rupestris, 
452 


Coturnix communis, 258, 428, 535 
County RecorpDs :— 

Berkshire — Marsh-Harrier, 148; 
Lesser Shrew, 381, 421; Bank 
Vole, 381, 421 

Cambridgeshire — Lesser Shrew, 
421 

Cheshire —Great Tit, 143; Long- 
tailed Field-Mouse, 421; Quail, 
428 

Derbyshire—Ring-Ouzel, 1; Orni- 
thological notes, 428; Dotterel, 
429 

Dorsetshire—Hoopoe, 322 

Devonshire—A visit to Lundy, 875 

Hissex—Lesser Rorqual, 517 

Gloucestershire—Blackcap, 187 


Hampshire—The Pike and its prey, 
282; Swift, 321; Hoopoe, 322; 
Pheasant, 323; Black-tailed God- 
wit, 428 

Hertfordshire—Common Buzzard, 
426; Quail, 428 

Kent—-Cuckoo, 262; Shoveler, 279; 
Garganey, 279; Great Skua, 521 

Lancashire — Hedge-Sparrow and 
Blackbird in a nest, 287; Doves, 
281 


Leicestershire — Sparrow-Hawk, 
426 

Lincolnshire — Bird-notes, 201; 
Stoat, 517 


Middlesex — Chiffchaff, 37; Red- 
billed Chough, 82 ; Cuckoo, 481; 
Rooks, 519 

Norfolk — Black-game, 89; notes, 
83, 97, 289, 241, 324; Wild-fowl 
in Yarmouth market, 99, 100, 
165-167 ; Iceland Gull, 101; 
Spoonbill, 104, 8323; Nuteracker, 
106; Icterine Warbler, 109; 

' Purple Heron, 112; Night Heron, 
118; Birds of Yarmouth, 153, 
397, 529; Cormorant, 240; 
Bearded Titmouse, 358, 422, 478; 
Sun-fish, 488; Edible Crab, 484 

Nottinghamshire—Partridge, 521 

Oxfordshvre—Ornithology of, 11; 
Great Crested Grebe, 11; Jay, 
15, 19; Marsh-Warbler, 15, 20; 
Great Tit, 19, 148; Cormorant, 
25; Barred Warbler, 26; Kite, 
27; Raven, 27; summer mi- 
grants, 238 

Scotland—Rook, 387; Capercaillie, 
39; Bleater Snipe near Aber- 
deen, 187; Birds during severe 
spring in Aberdeen, 238 ; Cuckoo 
in Aberdeen, 481; Black Rat in 
Forfarshire, 517; Siskin, 555 

Shropshire— Starlings, 131, 479; 
Mole, 142; Great Tit, 148; 
Hobby, 148, 382; Sea-Lamprey, 
144; Lesser Shrew, 186; Fly- 
catcher, 278; Little Crake, 280; 
Crossbill, 321; Tufted Duck, 506 

Somersetshire—Common Heron, 
38; Pied Flycatcher, 237; Mistle- 
Thrush, 821, 422; Marine Cen- 
tipede, 484; Marten, 517; Gan- 
net, 557 

Suffolk — Black-game, 39; Great 
Tit, 82; Great Grey Shrike, 82; 
Peregrine Falcon, 83; Purple 
Heron, 84; notes, 239; Oared 


CONTENTS. 


Shrew, 477; Pectoral Sandpiper, 
921; 55% |. 

Surrey—Water Shrew, 142; Great 
Spotted Woodpecker, 322; Cur- 
lew, 382; Cuckoo’s egg in Song 
Thrush’s nest, 520; Mammalia, 
559 

Sussex—Black Redstart, 37; Chiff- 
chaff, 143; Water-Pipit, 278; 
Melodious Warbler, 518 

Wales—Notes 76; Kite, 76, 79; 
Nuthatch, 78; Hoopoe, 82; Great 
Plover, 178, 270, 458; tameness 
of unmolested birds, 280; Little 
Owl, 482, 556; Vertebrate Fauna 
of North Wales, 485; Birds of 
Lleyn, 489 ; Jack Snipe 557 

Wiltshire—Marsh Warbler, 555 

Worcestershire — Lesser Shrew, 
142; Great Tit, 423; Sea-Lam- 
prey, 144; Green Plover, 187; 
Common Sparrow, 424; Starling, 
425; Swift, 479; Great Spotted 
Woodpecker, 278 

Yorkshire—Bittern, 83; Water 
Shrew, 186; notes, 229, 432; 
Black-headed Gull, 231; Lesser 
Tern, 282; Red-crested Pochard, 
483; Stone Curlew, 483; Levan- 
tine Shearwater, 521 

Crab, Edible, meristic variation in, 

484 

Crabs, mimicry and other habits of, 
287 

Crake, Little, in Shropshire, 280 

Crambessa, 346 - 

Crateropus bicolor, 122 

Creeper, Wall, on the Rigi, 269 

Crex pratensis, 29, 210, 535 

Crossbill, Common, in confinement, 
114; at Shrewsbury, 321 

Crow, Carrion, on the Rigi, 268 

Cuckoo in Redstart’s nest, 13; in 

Robin’s, 18; with egg in its mouth, 

105, 106; how does she carry the 

ege?, 262,—fie., 264; breeding in 

London district, 488, 489, 481; in 

the Shetlands, 426; in Aberdeen, 

481 

Cuculus canorus, 13, 20, 105, 106, 208, 
262, 231, 410, 426, 483, 488, 489, 
454, 481 

Curculionide, 347 

Curlew nesting in Surrey, 882; at 
sea, 483; Stone, in Cleveland in 

winter, 483 

Cyanecula suecica, 203, 398 

Cyclochila australasiz, 347 


Xill 


Cyclograpsus lavauxi, 348 
Cyclophoride, 305 
Cyclostoma, 306, 307, 308; articula- 
tum, 87; voltzianum, 805 
Cyclostomatide, 306 
Cygnus bewicki, 39, 529; commuta- 
bilis, 580; musicus, 529 
Cyprea europea, 316 
Cypreide, 316 
Cypridina, 356 
Cypris, 357 
Cypselus apus, 52, 208, 224, 269, 321, 
408, 453, 479, 520,556; melba, 224, 
409, 453 


Dafila acuta, 531 

Darwin’s ‘ Origin of Species,’ cheap 
edition, 390 

Daulias luscinia, 58, 398, 450 

Decoy, agreement for hiring a, 160 

Dendrocopus major, 278, 322, 409, 
433; minor, 322, 409, 433 

Dendrocyena eytoni, 419 

Derbyshire Ornithology, rough notes 
on, 428 

Dermacentor reticulatus, 326 

Diary, Observational, of habits of 
Great Plover, 178, 270, 458 

Diatomacez, 350 

Diomedea exulans, 288 ; 
phrys, 324 

Discomeduse, 346 

Discophore, 354 

Dismorphia, 553 

Dog and Fox hybrid, 477 

Doridide, 802 

Dotterel in Derbyshire, 429 

Doves, hybrid, 281 

Dyreissensia polymorpha, 343 

Drilus, 305 

Duck, Tufted, breeding in Shropshire, 
506 


melano- 


Echinus, 342; esculentus, 342 

Ecuador, a naturalist’s notes in, 93 

Kel, an extinct, in the English Chalk, 
198 

Egg of Cuckoo in Marsh-Warbler’s 
nest, 20,—in Hedge-Sparrow’s, 231, 
—in Song-Thrush’s, 520; of Aipy- 
ornis maximus, 48; of Aylesbury 
Duck, unusually large, 107 

Eggs, hard-set, a suggestion, 189; of 
Great Auk, sale, 8343; number of, 
in nest of Swift, 520, 556 

Elephant, African, large tusks of, 47 ; 
Sea, on Kergueeln’s Land, 441,— 
disturbed rest, fig., 444 


X1V 


Elvers, Eels, and Smolts, 343 
Elysia (Aplysiopterus), 302; viridis, 
302 


Elysiide, 302 

Emberiza cirlus, 406, 453; citrin- 
ella, 207, 221, 406; hortulana, 406, 
458; miliaria, 406, 453; schceniclus, 
207, 406 

Engraulis encrasicholus, 241 

Kolis, 302 

Kolidide, 302 

Ephthianura albifrons, 417 ; tricolor, 
417 

Equus quagga, 186 

Erithacus rubecula, 203, 218, 398, 
450 

Eristalis, 546 

Erythrogonys cinctus, 418 

Eudromias morinellus, 434 

Kulima intermedia, 319 

Kulimide, 319 

Europe, South-Western, ornithologi- 
cal notes from, 448 

Exeirus sp. ?, 547 


Facelina (Kolis) coronata, 302 

Faleo salon, 57, 209, 412, 484; 
cenchris, 455; melanogenys, 418; 
peregrinus, 57, 83, 209, 878, 412, 
454; subbuteo, 1438, 382, 412; tin- 
nunculus, 53, 57, 209, 412, 454; 
vespertinus, 412 

Falcon, Kestrel, on the Rigi, 268; 
Peregrine, in Suffolk, 83 

Fauna, Vertebrate, of North Wales, 
485 

Filaria equina (papillosa), 342 

Fish-culture in trains, 390 

Fish, sociable, 392 

‘* Fishes from Linné’s private collee- 
tion,’ 46; of the Firth of Forth 
and its tributaries, 47; heavy 
weight of some, 288 

Flower, the late Sir William, pro- 
posed memorial to, 440 

Flycatcher, feeding on worms, 278; 
Pied, in Somersetshire, 237; Spot- 
ted, on the Rigi, 268 

Formaldehyde as an aid in collecting 
ornithological specimens, 389 

Formalin as a preservative, 48 

Fox and Dog hybrid, 477 

Francolinus subtorquatus, 543 

Fratercula arctica, 877, 456 

Fregata minor, 418 

Fringilla ccelebs, 206, 221, 404, 458; 
montifringilla, 206, 404 

Fulica atra, 60, 456 


CONTENTS. 


Fuligula cristata, 58, 506, 532; ferina, 
58, 531; marila, 58, 532; nyroca, 
169, 582; rufina, 488, 531 


Gallinago ceelestis, 61, 187, 211, 456; 
gallinula, 61, 211, 557; major, 211 

Gallinula chloropus, 60, 535 

Gallirex, 332 

Gannet in Somersetshire, 557 

Garganey breeding in Kent, 279 

Garrulus glandarius, 207, 223, 407, 453 

Gasterosteus leiurus, 35 

Gastrophilns equi, 340; hzemorrhoi- 
dalis, 8340; nasalis, 340 

Gecinus viridis, 225, 822, 409 

Generic names, new, in ‘ Zoological 
Record,’ Index-volume to, 560 

Geophilus submarinus, 484 

Geronticus spinicollis, 419 

Glareola orientalis, 418, 419 

Godwit, Black-tailed, in confinement, 
114; in Hants, 428 

Goldecrest on the Rigi, 268 

Grebe, Great Crested, in Oxfordshire, 
| 

Gull, Black-headed, breeding in York- 
shire, 231; Iceland, in Norfolk, 
101; Little, on the Thames, 83 

Gyps fulvus, 454 


Habits, nesting, of Great Tit, 19, 82, 
143, 423,—Sparrow-Hawk, 881, 
426; of Great Plover, 1738, 270, 
458; of Crabs, 287; insectivorous, 
of Long-tailed Field-Mouse, 421; 
changed feeding in birds, 438 

Haddiscoe, winter notes from, 83 

Hemaphysalis punctata, 326 

Hematopinus macrocephalus, 340 

Hematopoda pluvialis, 340 

Hematopus ostralegus, 61, 210, 538 

Halcyon pyrrhopygius, 419; sanctus, 
419 

Haliaétus albicilla, 411 

Haliastur girrenera, 419; sphenurus, 
123 

Halias prasinana, 554 

Harelda glacialis, 5382 

Harrier, Marsh, nest, in Norfolk, 105; 
in Berkshire, 143 

Hawk, Sparrow, nesting habits, 381, 
426 

Hawkesbury Sandstone tunnelled by 

Termites, fig., 352 

Helicide, 291 

Helicina, 3038 

Helix, 292, 308; aspersa, 291; ne- 
moralis (hortensis), 291 


CONTENTS. 


Helcecius cordiformis, 349 

Heron, Common, serrated claws of, 
88, 85; Night, in Norfolk, 113; 
Purple, in Suffolk, 84,—in Norfolk, 
112 

Heteractitis brevipes, 418 

Heteropygia acuminata, 419 

Hieracidea occidentalis, 417 

Hippobosca equina, 340 

Hirundinide, 258, 260 

Hirundo rustica, 52, 206, 224, 258, 
260, 403, 452 

Hobby nesting in Shropshire, 143, 882 

Hoopoe in Anglesea, 82; in Hants 
and Dorset, 322 

Hyalomma affine, 327 

Hybrid between Goldfinch and Lin- 
net, 109; Doves, 281; Pheasant, 
323; Dog and Fox, 477 

Hydatina physis, 353 

Hydrobia ventrosa, 310; ulve, 810 

Hydrobiide, 310 

_ Hydrochelidon hybrida, 419 

Hyena crocuta, 546 

Hymenosoma varium, 348 

Hypoderma silenus, 340 

Hypolais icterina, 109; polyglotta, 518 

Hypolimnas, 553; bolina, 5538 


Index-volume to new generic names 
in ‘ Zoological Record,’ 560 

IRELAND. — Rose-coloured Starling, 
387; Bewick’s Swan, 39; Golden 
Plover, 40; Lapwing, 40, 144; Fox 
Shark (incorrectly Blue Shark, p. 
40), 188; Wild Swans, 187; some 
Birds observed, 213 

Isodide, 326 

Tynx torquilla, 225, 409 


Jay breeding in Oxfordshire, 19 
Jays, plague of, 15 

_Jeffreysia diaphana, 310 
Jeffreysiide, 310 

Julus, 3538 


Kallima, 539, 551 

Kangaroo, the new-born, how does it 
get into the mother’s pouch ?, 49 
(Plate I.) 

Kite in Oxfordshire, fragment of his- 
tory of, 27; breeding haunts in 
Mid- Wales, 76, 79 


Labrus maculatus, 241 
Lacerta vivipara, 36 
Lacuna, 308 

Lagopus scoticus, 60 


XV 


Lalage tricolor, 418 

Lamarck, new work on, by Dr. AI- 
pheus 8S. Packard, 390 

Lamna cornubica, 241 

Lamprey, Sea, at Shrewsbury, 144 

Lampris luna, 434 

Land birds at sea, 51, 144, 256 

Lanius collurio, 216, 402; excubitor, 
82, 402, 482; minor, 402; pomer- 
anus, 408, 451 

Lapwings in Moy Estuary, 40, 144 

Laridx, 256 

Larine, 62 

Larus argentatus, 226, 877; cachin- 
nans, 456; fuscus, 377; marinus, 
877; melanocephalus, 456; minu- 
tus, 83; nove hollandiz, 418; 
ridibundus, 456 

Lasiocampa quercifolia, 547 

Lepas pectinata ?, 350 

Lestis eratus, 353 

Ligurinus aurantiiventris, 258; chlo- 
ris, 206, 257, 408, 452 

Limacide, 289 

Limapontia, 303 

Limapontiide, 303 

Limax, 298, 294, 299, 801, 304; ar- 
borum, 808; filans of authors, a 
myth, 289 

Limnea, 295; auricularia, 296, 320; 
glabra, 300; palustris, 296; peregra, 
296; stagnalis, 295, 296; trunca- 
tula, 296 

Limnee, 295 

Limneide, 292, 298 

Limneus, 301 

Limosa belgica, 428 

Lincolnshire, North-east, Bird-notes 
during autumn migration of 1899, 
201 

Linota cannabina, 206, 379, 483, 453; 
flavirostris, 56, 206, 483, 482 

Litiopa, 804, 312, 313, 314; bombex, 
311; maculata, 311; melanostoma, 
310, 311 

Litiopide, 310 

Littorina, 308 

Littorinidz, 308 

Lleyn, West Carnarvonshire, Birds 
of, 489 

Locustella luscincides, 399; nevia, 
204, 399, 482 

Lopholatilus chamezleonticeps, 437 

Loxia bifasciata, 405; curvirostra, 
223, 821, 405, 483 

Lundy, a visit to, 375 

Lycaon pictus, 546 

Lygosoma equale, 353 


XVI 


Machetes pugnax, 211 

Macra stultorum, 533 

Macronyx capensis, 543 

Macrophthalmus setosus, 349 

Macropus giganteus, 49 

Macrorhinus angustirostris, 441 ; ele- 
phantinus, 441; leoninus, 441 

Malurus lambert, 419 

Mammalia of Surrey, 559 

Man and Apes, relation between, 528 

Mangilia (Pleurotoma) nebula, 319 

Mantide, 559 

Mareca penelope, 58, 210, 531 

Marten in Cleveland, 517 

Martin, Crag, on the Rigi, 269 

Megalestris catarrhactes, 521 

Megalomastoma antillarum, 306; 
guildingianum, 306; suspensum, 
305, 806, 3817, 320 

Melizophilus melanocephala, 518 

Melopsittacus undulatus, 417 

Mergus albellus, 533; cucullatus, 533 ; 
merganser, 533; serrator, 59, 533 

Merops apiaster, 409 

Microstylium apicale, 559 

Microtribonyx ventralis, 417 

Microtus glareolus, 381, 421 

Migrants, summer, lateness of, 238 

Migration notes from Great Yar- 
mouth, 324 

Millport Marine Biological Station, 
342 

Milvus ictinus, 215, 412, 454 

Mimicry, 32, 85, 116, 145, 287, 327, 
536 

Misocalius osculans, 419 

Mitra saltata, 319 

Mitride, 319 

Mole, variety, 142, 186 

Molluscs, Spinning, 289 (Plate IIT. ‘i 

Motacilla alba, 220, 401, 451; flava, 
401, 451; lugubris, 55, 205, 220, 
401, 451; melanope, 205, 401; 
rali, 205, 221, 401 ; sulphurea, 220 

Mouse, Long- tailed Field, insecti- 
vorous habits, 421 

Mugil, 356 

Mullus surmuletus, 288 

Mus minutus, 321; rattus, 517; syl- 
vaticus, 421 

Muscicapa atricapilla, 206, 237, 278, 
408, 4382; grisola, 206, 217, 4038, 
452; parva, 403 

Mustela erminea, 517; martes, 517 

Mycteris longicarpus, 348 


Names of British Birds, their origin 
and meaning, 511, 558 


CONTENTS. 


Nautilograpsus minutus, 350 

Nectocarcinus integrifrons, 349, 354 

Nematoda, 340 

Neomys fodiens, 142 

Neophron perenopterus, 258, 454 

Neptunus pelagicus, 354, 357; san- — 
guinolentus, 354 

Neritina fluviatilis, 803 

Nest of Missel-Thrush at low eleva- 
tion, 12; of Redstart and Robin 
with young of Cuckoo, 13; of Haw- 
finch emptied by Cuckoo, Rook, 
and Jackdaw, 18; of Marsh-War- 
bler with egg of Cuckoo in Oxford- 
shire, 20,—in Norfolk, 105; of 
Marsh Harrier in Norfolk, 105,— 
in Berkshire, 143 ; of Great Tit in 
active beehive, 143; of Bearded 
Titmouse with eight eggs, 107, 367 

Nest and young, care of, 247 

Nesting of Barn and Long-eared Owls 
in Oxfordshire, 11; of Great Tut, 
19, 82, 143,—in Worcestershire, 
423; of Hobby in Shropshire, 1438, 
382; notes, 239; of Curlew in 
Surrey, 382; of Common Sparrow, 
424, 519; of Starling, 425; of 
Marsh-Warbler in Wiltshire, 555 

Nettion castaneum, 419; crecca, 209 

Niszetus morphnoides, 419 

Noctiluca miliaris, 356 

Noctiluce, 356 

Norfolk, ornithological notes from, 
for 1899, 97 (Plate II.) ; notes from, 
239 

Notes and songs of Birds, variations 
in, 382 

Nucifraga caryocatactes, 407 

Numenius arquata, 62, 212, 382, 456; 
phezopus, 212 

Nutcracker in Norfolk, 106; on the 
Rigi, 268 

Nuthatch at Aberystwyth, 78 

Nyctala tengmalmi, 410 

Nyctea scandica, 410 

Nycticorax griseus, 414 


OBITUARY :— 

Anderson, Dr. John, M.D., F.R.S., 
440 

Atkinson, Canon, 200 
Coues, Dr. Elliott, 80 
Cross, William, 248 
Edwards, M. Milne, 248 
Layard, EH. L., 47 
Mivart, Dr. St. George, 200 
Paget, Sir James, 48 
Russ, Dr. Carl, 81 


CONTENTS. 


Ocypoda cardimana, 348 
Odostomia, 318; acicula, 319; war- 
reni, 318 
(Hdemia fusca, 59, 533; nigra, 59, 
533 
(idicnemus crepitans, 178, 270, 458 ; 
scolopax, 483 
Opah at the Shetlands, 434 
Ophideres, 553 
Opisthobranchiata, 301 
Oriolus galbula, 257, 402 
Orkney, mainland, Birds seen in 
south-east, 54 
Orthagoriscus mola, 483 
Ossifraga gigantea, 418 
Otis tarda, 456 
Otocorys alpestris, 408 
Otolithus zquidens, 288 
Ouzel, Ring, in Derbyshire, 1; on 
the Rigi, 268 
Owl, Barn, and Long-eared, nesting 
in Oxfordshire, 11 ; Little, in Flint- 
shire ?, 482, 556,—in Anglesea, 556, 
-—introduced into various parts of 
_ the kingdom, 556 
Oxfordihire, notes on ornithology of 
(1896-98), 11 
Oxyuris curvula, 341; mastigodes, 
841 


Paleontology, position in Biology, 
52.7 

Pandion haliaétus, 413 

Panurus biarmicus, 358, 440, 422,478 

Pardalotus rubricatus, 419 

Partnership, curious, of Hedge-Spar- 
row and Blackbird in a nest, 237 

Partridge, chestnut-coloured, 14, 23, 
25,.26, 101, 111 

Partridges in Nottinghamshire, 521 

Parus ater, 220, 268, 451; britanni- 
cus, 400; ceruleus, 205, 220, 401, 
451; cristatus, 401 ; major, 19, 82, 
143, 204, 219, 400, 423, 451; pa- 
lustris, 205, 220, 401, 451; sylvati- 
cus, 479 . 

Passer domesticus, 56, 74, 144, 206, 
222, 249, 404, 424, 452, 519; his- 
paniolensis, 453; montanus, 221, 
404 

Pastor roseus, 37, 407 

Patella vulgata, 342 

Pavia Zoological Meeting, 265 

Pearl on Fresh-water Mussel, 348 

Pectinibranchiata, 304 

Penzus canaliculatus, 354; esculen- 
tus, 354 

Penguins on an antarctic island, 527 


XVil 


Pentaroge marmorata, 354 

Perdix cinerea, 455, 521, 584; mon- 
tana, 111 

Pernis apivorus, 412 

Pestis bubonica, 357 

Petromyzon branchialis, 241; mari- 
nus, 144 

Phaéthon rubricauda, 260 

Phalacrocoracide, mode of progres- 
sion under water, 557 

Phalacrocorax carbo, 57, 418, 455; 
eraculus, 57, 413, 455, 557; sticto- 
cephalus, 419; varius, 417 

Phalaropus hyperboreus, 211 

Phaps chalcoptera, 355 

Phasianus colchicus, 584 

Pheasant, hybrid, 323 

Philinide, 301 

Philomycide, 289 

Phylloseopus collybita, 219; rufus, 
82, 148, 204, 399, 482, 450; sibila- 
trix, 204, 450; superciliosus, 144 ; 
trochilus, 204, 219, 258, 399, 432 

Physa (Bulla), 299, 800, 301; fonti- 
nalis, 298, 299, 800; hypnorum, 
299, 300, 320 

Physide, 298 

Pica rustica, 223, 407 

Pieris brassice, 24 

Pigeon, Wood, eating molluses, 484 

Pike and its prey, 282 

Pilumnopeus serratifrons, 348, 349 

Pipit, Water, in Sussex, 278 

Pipits (Meadow, Tree, and Water) on 
the Rigi, 268, 269 

Planaxis, 318 

Planaxide, 318 

Planaria variegata, 303 

Planorbis, 295, 297; carinatus, 297 ; 
complanatus, 297; contortus, 297 ; 
spirorbis, 297 

Platalea leucorodia, 828, 414 

Platycephalus fuscus, 355 

Plectrophenax nivalis, 56, 207, 238, 
406 

Plegadis falcinellus, 414 

Pleuronectes platessa, 241 

Pleurotomatide, 319 

Plover, Great, habits of, 173, 270, 
458; Golden, in Moy Estuary, 40, 
144; Green, in unusual numbers, 
187 

Pochard, Red-crested, in Yorkshire, 
483 

Podiceps auritus, 64; cristatus, 428 ; 
fluviatilis, 64, 212, 456; nestor, 
419 

Peecilopsaltria horizontalis, 549 


XV1il 


Point Cloates, N.W. Australia, notes 
from, 416 

Polycera lessonii, 802; quadrilineata 
(var. non-lineata), 302 

Polyceride, 302 

Pomatorhinus rubeculus, 419 

Porcellana dispar, 348 

Porzana bailloni, 5385; maruetta, 210, 
536; parva, 280, 535 


Pratincola rubetra, 2038, 398, 449; 
rubicola, 208, 398, 482 

Procellaria pelagica, 880, 457, 483 

Promachus, 559 

Proteles cristatus, 543 

Psaltoda moerens, 347 

Pseudacre, 553 

Psoroptes communis var. equi, 340 

Pteropus poliocephalus, 349 

Ptilotis keartlandi, 417; leilavalen- 
sis, 416; sonora, 417; tricolor, 417 

Puffinus anglorum, 379; yelkouanus, 
521 

Pulmonata, 291 

Pupide, 291, 292 

Pyramidellide, 318 

Pyrrhocorax alpinus, 453; graculus, 
82, 379 


Pyrrhula enucleator, 405; europza, 
223, 405, 453; major, 405 


Quail in Cheshire, 428; in Hertford- 
shire, 428 

Querquedula circia, 279, 531; crecca, 
531 


Rallus aquaticus, 128, 210, 535 

Rana temporaria in Scilly Islands, 
383 

Rat, Black, in Forfarshire, 517 

Raven in Oxfordshire, fragment of 
history, 27 

Redpoll, Lesser, on the Rigi, 268 

Redstart, Black, at Brighton, 37 

Redstarts (Black and Common) on 
the Rigi, 268 

Regulus cristatus, 204, 219, 399 ; igni- 
eapillus, 399 

Resemblance, conscious protective, 
536, 550 

Rigi, Birds on the, 268 

Rissa tridactyla, 377, 456 

Rissoa, 304, 809; abyssicola, 309; 
eancellata, 809; carinata (stria- 
tula), 809; fulgida, 309; membra- 
nacea, 3809; parva, 308, 309; pul- 
cherrima, 809; striatula, 309; vit- 


rea, 309 
Rissox, 310 


CONTENTS. 


Rissoide, 308 

Robin on the Rigi, 268 

Rook in Scotland, 37 

Rooks in London, 519 

Rorqual, Lesser, in Essex Blackwater, 
ral rg 

Ruticilla pheenicurus, 203, 218, 259, 
398, 449 ; titys, 87, 218, 3894, 450 


Scolopax rusticola, 211 

Seops giu, 411 

Seal and Whale Fishery (1899), 65 

Seementina, 297; lineata (Planorbis 
lineatus),. 297 . 

Serinus hortulanus, 222, 404, 452 

Sesarma erythrodactyla, 348 

Shark, Fox (incorrectly ‘“‘ Blue” at 
p- 40) in Killala Bay, Co. Mayo, 188 

Shearwater, Levantine, at Scar- 
borough, 521 

Shetland, ornithological notes from, 
281 

Shoveler breeding in Kent, 279 

Shrew, Lesser,in Worcestershire,142, 
—in Shropshire, 186,—in Berks, 
381, 421,—in Cambridgeshire, 421; 

Oared, in Suffolk, 477; Water, 
taken three miles from water, 142, 
186 

Shrike, Great Grey, in Suffolk, 82 

Singing of birds during thunderstorm, 
188 

Siskin on the Rigi, 268; is it an 
autumn and winter songster ?, 555 

Sitta cesia, 401 

Sittella pileata, 419 

Skenea planorbis, 310 

Skeneide, 310 

Skua, Buffon’s, in Shetland, 281; 
Great, in Kent, 521 

Snakes, British, 560 

Snipe, Bleater, near Aberdeen, 187 ; 
Jack, early, 557 

Snowfinch on the Rigi, 269 

SocrrTIES — Hampstead Astronomi- 
cal and Scientific Society, 47; Ita- 
lian Zoological Union, 265 

Solariidz, 318 

Solea lascaris, 241; vulgaris, 241 

Somateria mollissima, 59, 582; stel- 
leri, 532 

Songs and notes of birds, variations, 
in, 882 

Sorex fodiens var. ramifer, 477; pyg- 
meus, 186; minutus, 142, 381, 421 

Sparrow, Hedge, and Blackbird, 
curious partnership of, in a nest, 
237; House, sexual differences in 


CONTENTS. 


wing-feathering, 74, 249,—nesting 
of, 424, 519 

Spatula clypeata, 209, 279, 423, 530 

Spheroma, 348 

Spiroptera megastoma, 342; micro- 
stoma, 242 

Spoonbill in Norfolk, 104; not speech- 
less, 104; at Great Yarmouth, 323 

Squatarola helvetica, 210 

Squilla levis, 354 

Starling, Rose-coloured, in Co. Mayo, 
37; nesting, 425 

Starlings, movements of, 131, 472 

Stauropus alternus, drawings of cat- 
erpillar, 198 . 

Stenogyride, 291 

Stercorarius crepidatus, 63 ; parasiti- 
cus, 281 

Sterna macrura, 212 

Stipiturus ruficeps, 416 

Stoat, albino, in Lincolnshire, 517 

Strepsilas interpres, 61, 216, 538 

Strix flammea, 208. 410 

Sturnus vulgaris, 53, 56, 131, 144, 207, 
406, 425, 483, 453 

Sula bassana, 376, 413, 455, 557 

Sunfish in Yarmouth Roads, 483 

Swan, Bewick’s, in Moy Estuary, 39 

Swans, Wild, in North Ireland, 187 

Swift on the Rigi, 269 ; early appear- 
ance, 3821; some notes on, 479; 
number of eggs in nest, 520, 556 

Switzerland, distribution of some 
birds observed in, 213 

Sydney, Zoological notes from, 345 
(Plate IV.) 

Sylvia atricapilla, 187, 219, 399, 450; 
cinerea, 208, 399, 450; curruca, 
203, 432; hortensis, 208, 399, 450; 
melanocephala, 518; nisoria, 26, 
204; rufa, 219; sarda, 450, 518; 
undata, 399 

Symbiotes communis var. equi, 340 

Syrnium aluco, 410 

Syrrhaptes paradoxus, 534 


Tabanus autumnalis, 340; bovinus, 
340 

Tadorna casarca, 580; cornuta, 530 

Tenia mamillana, 840; perfoliata, 
340, 341; plicata, 340 

Talorchestia quadrimana, 348 

Talpa europea, 142, 186 

Tameness of unmolested birds, 280 

Tephrocorys cinerea, 543 

Termites, rocks honeycombed by, 352 

Tern, Lesser, destruction, in York- 
shire, 232 


X1x 


Testacella scutulum, 291 

Testacellide, 291 

Tetrao tetrix, 93 

Thalamita sima, 354 

Thalassogeron chlororhynchus, 418 

Thopha saccata, 346, 347 

Thrush, Missel, nests at low eleva- 
tions, 12; attacking Squirrel, 321; 
laying twice in same nest, 422 

Thrushes (Missel, Rock, and Song) 
on the Rigi, 268, 269 

Tibicen curvicosta, 347; nubifurca,’ 
559 

Ticks, rare English, 326 

Tinnunculus cenchroides, 417 

Titmouse, Bearded, short history of 
(Plate V.), 358,—nest, fig., 367,— 
feeding young, fig., 368,—cleaning 
out nest, fig., 369,—general distri- 
bution, fig., 874,—corrections, 422, 
478,—and other birds in Norfolk, 
422; Coal, on the Rigi, 268; Great, 
nesting habits, 19, 82, 148, 423 

Torinia, 318 

Totanus calidris, 62; canescens, 212; 
fuscus, 212; glareola, 212; hypo- 
leucus, 211, 456; ochropus, 212 

Trematoda, 340 

Trichodectes pilosus, 340; pubescens, 
340 

Trigonorhina fasciata, 357 

Tringa acuminata, 558; alpina, 211; 
canutus, 211; maculata, 521, 557; 
minuta, 167, 201; subarcuata, 211 

Trochonanina, 291 ; conula (Microcys- 
tis conula), 291, 292 

Troglodytes parvulus, 205, 401, 451 

Tropidonotus berus, 33; natrix, 33, 
36 

Tryngites rufescens, 110 

Tubicinella trachealis, 286 

Tudora, 807, 8308; megacheila, 307 

Turacus, 332 

Turdus communis, 260; iliacus, 55, 
202, 206, 397; merula, 55, 202, 
217, 237, 281, 398, 449; musicus, 
202, 217, 259, 897; pilaris, 55, 202, 


397; torquatus, 1, 398; varius, 
3898; viscivorous, 202, 217, 3821, 
398, 422 


Turkeys, Wild, from Canada, 94 
Turtur communis, 52, 146, 210, 225, 
257, 455, 5384; risorius, 257 


Upupa epops, 58, 82, 257, 322, 409, 
454 

Urenchelys anglicus, 198 

Uria grylle, 63; troile, 63, 377, 457 


XX 


Valvata, 304; piscinalis, 315 

Valvatidx, 315 

Vanellus vulgaris, 40, 61, 187, 210 

Vanessa atalanta, 33; io, 83,—and 
urtice, strange hybernating quar- 
ters for, 559 

Variety of Partridge, 14, 28, 25, 26, 
101, 111; Hooded Crow, 101; 
Black-throated Diver, 101; Bram- 
bling, 103; Hedge-Sparrow, 108; 
Green Woodpecker, 109; Mole, 
186; Sparrow-Hawk, 215, Jackdaw, 
233; Fox-cub, 233; Weasel, 235; 
Sole, 241; Stoat, 517 

Vipera berus, 393 

Vitrina pellucida, 291 

Vitrinide, 291 

Vole, Bank, in Berks, 381, 421 


Wagtail, White, on the Rigi, 269 

Wales, Mid, ornithological notes from, 
76; North Wales, Vertebrate Fauna, 
414 

Warbler, Barred, in Oxfordshire, 26; 
Blackcap, on the Rigi, 268; Icter- 
ine, in Norfolk, 109; Marsh, in 
Oxfordshire, 15,—nest, containing 
egg of Cuckoo, fig., 20,—in Wilt- 
shire, 555; Melodious, in Sussex, 
518; Sardinian, 518 

Whale and Seal Fishery (1899), 65 

White, Gilbert, and his recent Editors, 
Prof. Newton on, 391 


CONTENTS. 


Whitethroat, 259 

Wildfowl at Breydon, 157, 159,—at 
Fritton Decoy, 160, 239; and other 
birds, at Great Yarmouth market, © 
99, 100, 165, 166, 167 

Wilsden District (Yorkshire), orni- 
thological notes from, 432 

Wing-feathering of House-Sparrow, 
sexual differences in, 74, 249 

Woodpecker, Great Spotted, 278,—in 
Surrey, 822; Green, with beak like 
Crossbill’s, 109,—and sp. ?, on the 
Rigi, 268 

Worms, Horse, 340 

Wren on the Rigi, 268 


Yarmouth, Great, and neighbour- 
hood, Birds of, 158, 397, 529,—area 
of distribution, fig., 154,—principal 
works relating to, 177; notes from, 
241 

Yorkshire, Natural History notes 
from, for 1899, 229, 482 

Young and nest, care of, 247 


Zonotidx, 291 

Zoological Meeting of Pavia, 265 

Zoology, teachings of, brought to the 
aid of practical warfare, 152; at 
British Association, 527 

Zosterops lutea, 418 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 
FACE 
Plate I. Macropus giganteus ‘ to face 49 
» Ll. Perdix cinerea var. montana, Briss. : ' : pe 97 
», LII. Spinning Molluscs . ; a 289 
», LV. Neptunus pelagicus, M. lida 3 - 345 
» V. (Map). Former Br pote aa se 1n England o ay Pama 

brarmucus ” 374 
Nest of Marsh Warbler . : 20 

Map showing area of distribution of Birds of Great Yarmouth and 
Neighbourhood : : 154 
Sketch showing distended throat of Cuckoo : 264 
‘‘ Hawkesbury Sandstone ” tunnelled by Termites . 852 
Nest of Bearded Titmouse (after Pike) . ‘ ; «youd 
Bearded Titmouse feeding young (after Pike) , “ ‘ : . 9868 
KY * cleaning out nest ,, 3 ; 4 . 369 
a map showing general distribution ; . 874 
Dilated cesophagus of Adder (Vipera berus) . 395 
Sea-Hlephants: disturbed rest : 4it4 
Nest of Tufted Duck (Fuligula cristata) 509 


Aa ZOOLOGIST 


No. 703.—January, 1900. 


THE RING-OUZEL IN DERBYSHIRE. 
By W. Srorrs Fox, M.A., F.Z.S. 


In recording my observations on the Ring-Ouzel (Turdus 
torquatus), I have no expectation of writing anything original. 
But I think it possible that personal notes on this interesting 
bird may be acceptable to those ornithologists who are less 
familiar with it than I am. On certain points I am bound to 
disagree with well-known writers. Where I have not felt 
sufficient confidence in my own experience, I have consulted my 
friend Mr. David Peat, who has lived all his life on the Derby- 
shire moors, and who now lives in the midst of the best ground 
for Ring-Ouzels which I know. He is a most careful and 
accurate observer of birds. And I am glad to find that his 
experience entirely supports my own. I am inclined to suppose 
that the birds of one locality sometimes differ slightly in habits 
from those of another. It is for this reason that I have headed 
my paper “ The Ring-Ouzel in Derbyshire.” 

I believe that most ornithologists agree with me in con- 
sidering this bird a special favourite. There is something so 
romantic, so wild, so free about it and its surroundings. Mac- 
gillivray’s lines on the Song-Thrush— 

‘‘Far away, far away, far away 
The haunts of men ’”’— 


seem specially true of the Ring-Ouzel. For we may walk for 
Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., January, 1900. B 


2 THK ZOOLOGIST. 


hours over the moors without so much as a sight or sound of a 
human being, hearing only the swish of the wind in the heather, 
the cheep of the Meadow Pipit, the angry cry of the Lapwing as 
we approach too near to her eggs or brood, the distant complaint 
of the Curlew, or the sad sweet whistle of the Golden Plover, 
when suddenly a sharp sound startles us. Is it some geologist 
chipping off a specimen of millstone grit? But what can he 
want so far on the open moor ? Again we hear the clear “ tac 
tac tac.” We look around, and, behold, not far off is a bird, not 
“ black as jet,” like the Blackbird, but sooty-black, relieved only 
by the white crescent on his breast. ‘Tac tac tac”? we hear 
again, and with each syllable up goes his tail. His cry alarms 
the Grouse-cock, who flies off, and from a distance calls warn- 
ingly “Go back, go back.” I first made his acquaintance near 
Loch Skeen, in Dumfriesshire. ‘There I came suddenly upon a 
party of six, no doubt a family party. But it is here in Derby- 
shire that I have become familiar with him, either on the open 
moor, or down a gully cut by a peaty brook, or under those 
grand “edges” of gritstone clear-cut and precipitous against the 
blue sky which to the uninitiated suggest cliffs bounding an 
inland sea. But it is not only in the land of heather that the 
Ring-Ouzel is to be found. Soon after I came to live in Derby- 
shire, to my surprise I met him in the wilder parts of our dales, 
and there found his nest concealed in some corner of the lime- 
stone crags. Nor is it really surprising that he loves to haunt 
these dales. ‘They are not wide fertile valleys, nor are they 
glens with sloping sides, dividing mountain from mountain. 
They are rather rifts cut right through the middle of a flat- 
topped hill. On a bleak April day the traveller may wander 
over the dreary uplands, disheartened by the everlasting greyness 
around him—grey sky above, grey stone walls, grey grass—with 
no colour; not even a hedge or ploughed field to relieve the 
monotony with their deeper browns. Quite suddenly the scene 
changes. He is standing at the edge of a dale, looking down 
upon the deep green of spruce-firs, and below them is a little river 
clear as crystal, bright with the most vivid emerald-green of the 
water-weeds over whichitruns. Isit fancy ? Isit fairy-land? He 
clambers down to the water. Here he is sheltered from the biting 
wind. He finds woods carpeted with dog’s-mercury (Mercurialis 


THE RING-OUZEL IN DERBYSHIRE. 3 


perennis), and here and there an early primrose. As he wanders 
further up the dale the woods give place to low thorn-bushes. After 
a while even these cease, and he soon comes to a cave out of which 
the clear waters of the river flow. Itis here that the river has its 
origin. Here in the cave he finds a Dipper’s (Cinclus aquaticus) 
nest already containing eggs. Further up the dale no mur- 
muring stream accompanies our traveller. Even here it is lonely 
enough. Allis still. Though perhaps, if he is lucky, he may 
hear the cheery song of the Dipper, or the monotonous warble of 
a solitary Wheatear. Only one loud sound greets his ear—the 
chatter of the busy Jackdaws as they fly to and from the cracks 
in the rocks, or talk business and gossip on the ledges. But 


what is that ? 
‘“‘ A whistle strikes his startled ear ! 
A pipe of shrillest, wildest tone.’ 


It is the Ring-Ouzel high up on the rocks, his song echoing from 
crag to crag. 

Having given this brief picture of the haunts of the bird, we 
must now consider his habits more or less in detail. 

Time of Arrival.—In the ‘ Birds of Northamptonshire’ (vol. 1. 
p. 99), Lord Lilford says:—‘‘I have observed the bird in our 
immediate neighbourhood on its return migration about the end 
of April.” Rev. H. A. Macpherson (‘ Fauna of Lakeland,’ p. 89) 
writes :-—‘‘ The last days of March witness the return of the 
Ring-Ouzels to their upland home.” ‘The earliest date on which 
I have heard or seen these birds in the Peak district was April 
4th; but there are no Ring-Ouzels within three miles of my 
house, so that I may easily miss them on their first arrival. 
Mr. Peat recorded their advent on March 26th, 1894. So far as 
he remembers that is the earliest date he has known. The spring 
of 1894 was apparently an ‘“‘early” one, for Mr. Peat found a 
Lapwing’s egg on March 29th, a week before the usual date. But 
in that same year the Ring-Ouzels had not arrived in Lathkil 
Dale by March 30th. As arule only a few birds appear at first, 
_ but are soon reinforced by a second batch. 

General Habits, Food, Range, éc.—Mr. Peat informs me that 
when first the birds arrive the margins of the feathers are paler 
than they are a little later in the season, giving the bird a more 


* Colquhoun’s ‘ Moor aiid the Loch,’ vol. 11. p. 119. 
B2 


4 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


greyish tint. Birds have been noticed with a few white feathers 
on the sides of the neck; and a cock in my collection has a dark 
spot in the centre of its white crescent. 

I cannot agree with some authors as to the likeness of the 
Ring-Ouzel to the Blackbird. St. John (‘Sport in Moray,’ 
p- 103) writes:—‘‘The Ring-Ouzel so much resembles the 
Blackbird in shape and figure that ata little distance they may 
be easily mistaken for each other.”” And Macgillivray (‘ British 
Birds,’ vol. ii. p. 102) says that “‘its manners are very similar 
to those of the Blackbird.” No doubt a casual observer might 
mistake one for the other, just as he might mistake a Fieldfare 
for a Song-Thrush. But the attention of the field naturalist is 
at once arrested by the larger size, less neat and sleek appearance 
(partly due to its duller colours), the bolder flight, and the very 
distinct cry of the Ring-Ouzel. The white crescent on the 
breast is also very noticeable in the mature cock, but would not 
help much towards the identification of the hen or young birds. 
In Prof. Newton’s ‘ Dictionary of Birds’ (p. 667) it is stated that 
this bird prefers ‘‘ the shelter of rocks to that of trees.” Again, 
Macgillivray states that, ‘‘like the Song-Thrush, it conceals 
itself among bushes, but is much more easily put to flight ” 
(‘ British Birds,’ vol. u. p. 103). And Seebohm also (‘ British 
Birds,’ vol. i. p. 246) gives the impression that it skulks, saying 
that it ‘‘ either drops down into the heath, or flies away to a more 
secluded resting-place””’; though in the earlier part of his account 
of this species he gives quite a contrary impression. I have seen 
Ring-Ouzels in Derbyshire, in Argyllshire, and in Dumfriesshire, 
but never have I known any tendency to skulk on the part of old 
birds. On the contrary, in this respect their habits much more 
nearly approach those of the Missel-Thrush. Indeed, if they 
have a nest, they remain in sight much more than the Missel- 
Thrush. This is partly due to the nature of their haunts, where 
the cover is generally low-growing. But under all circumstances, 
during their stay with us, they fly boldly up when alarmed, 
pitching on the top of a rock or wall, or sometimes a tree, from 
whence they can closely watch all the movements of intruders. 
Very rarely have I been able to approach near enough to see the 
sitting bird before it left the nest. I say it, because I have some 
reason to believe that at times the cock assists in the duties of 


THE RING-OUZEL IN DERBYSHIRE, 5 


incubation. On June 2nd, 1894, I found a Ring-Ouzel’s nest in 
a hollow on the moors. The eggs were partly incubated, and the 
cock was on thenest. I retired some distance, and then returned, 
again to find the cock on the nest. I then sat down at a short 
distance from the nest. The cock kept hanging around, and in 
about ten minutes entered the hollow, and there remained for two 
or three minutes. I had taken the eggs for a museum, so that 
there was nothing to induce him to stay longer. They certainly 
are shy birds. Gadatke (‘ Birds of Heligoland,’ p. 252) writes :— 
“They are here, next to the Missel-Thrush, the shyest and most 
cunning of all the Thrushes.” When disturbed feeding in some 
lonely moorland field, on their first arrival here, or far from their 
nests, or, again, when family duties are at an end, up they fly, 
perch on a wall, and presently, if the unwelcome visitor does not 
withdraw, they betake themselves to some distant feeding ground. 
By stealing quietly up to a wall, and slowly raising the eyes 
above its top, one may watch the Ring-Ouzels as they hop about 
such a field, feeding after the manner of the other members of 
their genus, hopping quietly for a few paces, then stopping as if 
listening for some expected sound, and sooner or later bounding 
suddenly forward, and with vigorous tugs hauling an unlucky 
worm from its retreat. Seebohm states (‘ British Birds,’ vol. i. 
p. 245) that the Ring-Ouzel, like the Song-Thrush and Black- 
bird, breaks snails’ shells against stones. I should like to have 
some further evidence of this. I can only say that neither 
Mr. Peat nor I have ever witnessed anything of the sort. On the 
moors there are very few snails, but in the wilder parts of the 
dales great quantities may be found. 

There is no doubt that Ring-Ouzels are fond of berries. In 
July and August their droppings are often stained as a result of 
the bilberries and cloudberries which they have eaten. And at 
times they take heavy toll on gardens near their haunts. 

But I must recur to their supposed skulking habits. When 
the young birds first leave the nest they have a peculiar twitter- 
ing call, not altogether unlike the song of the Wheatear. If, 
attracted by this sound, an attempt is made to approach them, 
and to observe them at close quarters, they will generally fly for 
some fifty yards, and plunge into the heather. I have caught 
many young Ring-Ouzels by marking the spot where they thus 


6 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


disappeared, and quietly stalking up to it, and then quickly 
searching the heather, and seizing the bird. For instance, I have 
a note, ‘Caught four young Ring-Ouzels”” on June 22nd, 1887. 
Years ago I kept many for weeks in my aviary, but unfortunately 
I have no notes respecting them. As to the old birds, I must 
repeat that, according to my experience, they always fly to some 
point of vantage, just as a Missel-Thrush flies to a tree. Some- 
times in rough country they are out of sight for a few minutes 
behind a hillock, and before or after the nesting season they 
often fly off to a distance; but I have never known one skulk. 
I have, moreover, questioned Mr. Peat very particularly on this 
point, and his experience is exactly similar to mine. 

When they have eggs or nestlings they are often very bold. I 
have known them dash past my face, nearly touching it. I have 
also witnessed a pair driving a Kestrel from their neighbourhood. 
I have, however, never known them ‘reel and tumble on the 
ground to decoy you away,” as Seebohm states (‘ British Birds,’ 
vol. i. p. 248). This can hardly be a common habit. Many 
brooding birds fly low and feebly when first leaving the nest, as 
if stiff with long sitting; but I have never noticed even this in 
the Ring-Ouzel. 

Song.—Perhaps its song is inspiring rather on account of 
what it suggests than because of its intrinsic beauty. It is not 
very varied, but its few rich notes ring out on the silent moor, or 
echo from rock to rock in the deserted dales. It is perfectly 
easy to distinguish it from the song of any other bird. And this 
is true also of its call. How the loud “ tac tac tac” of the Ring- 
Ouzel can be mistaken by a naturalist for the metallic cry of the 
Blackbird, I cannot conceive. I once (April 11th, 1895) heard a 
Ring-Ouzel make a low sound like the scolding of a Whitethroat; 
but this is unusual. Also on one occasion only have I known it 
sing when flying. 

Date of Nesting. — On April 29th, 1895, I found a Ring- 
Ouzel’s nest containing two eggs, but that was ten days or a fort- 
night earlier than I usually see them. June 28th (1888) is the 
latest date on which I have found them. These were at an 
advanced stage of incubation, and I have not known of young 
birds in the nest at a later date. But I must confess that I do 
not look much for eggs after June, so that it might be possible to 


THE RING-OUZEL IN DERBYSHIRE. 7 


meet with them much later. Whitlock (‘Birds of Derbyshire,’ 
p. 31) records the finding of a nest on Aug. 2nd, 1885. 

Materials of the Nest.—According to my experience, the typical 
Ring-Ouzel’s nest has its foundation and outer walls constructed 
of bracken-stalks, with a stem or two of heather sometimes inter- 
woven. In all the nests which I have examined there has been a 
layer of mud, and without exception they have been lined with 
fine bents. At times, however, the outer structure varies. A 
nest which I found in 1894 on the moors had this part composed 
of grass, moss, bracken, a leaf, a heather-stalk, and a rootlet. 
Another, which was placed in a crevice of rock in one of our dales, 
had a sort of loose foundation (probably intended to tilt it up on 
the outer side) of grass and moss. Upon this was an irregular 
cup of mud and moss, encircled round the top with a wreath of 
dry grass and dead stalks of some herbaceous plant (probably one 
of the Umbellifere). The lining, which was a quite separate 
structure, was of fine bents, with here and there a piece of leaf or 
of stonecrop (Sedum acre). The first spring which I spent within 
reach of the Peak district was that of 1887. It was not till then 
that I searched for Ring-Ouzels’ nests; but during that season I 
found eighteen. Of these the seventh, containing eggs, quite 
deceived me at first. The outside was entirely made of moss, and 
I mistook it for a Blackbird’s nest. There were five eggs in it, 
and I took two of them, as they were very beautifully marked. A 
day or two later I showed these to a friend, who at once said that 
he was convinced that they were Ring-Ouzel’s eggs. Accordingly 
I revisited the nest on three occasions, and eventually had the 
satisfaction not only of seeing the old birds near it, but also of 
identifying the three young birds as Ring-Ouzels; for there is no 
difficulty in distinguishing a Ring-Ouzel from a Blackbird during 
their nestling plumage. 

This shows conclusively that the nests of these two species 
are occasionally very similar; but I cannot agree with Seebohm 
when he says that ‘‘it would be almost impossible to discriminate 
between them were we not aware that the Blackbird does not haunt 
the wide open moor”’ (‘ British Birds,’ vol. 1. p. 247; the same 
words are used in his ‘Eggs of British Birds,’ p. 182). The 
range of the Blackbird overlaps that of the Ring-Ouzel. Only 
last year (1898) I saw a Ring-Ouzel fly from a likely place, and, 


8 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


on examining it, I discovered the beginnings of a nest. When, 
however, I next visited the place, the nest was completed, but a 
hen Blackbird was sitting on it. I am convinced that there are 
only two ways of identifying Ring-Ouzels’ eggs, and one is by 
seeing the parent bird leave the nest, or anxiously hanging around 
in its proximity. If this fails, and an egg is taken from a nest, 
the only other plan is to visit it again when the young birds are 
feathered. In 1890 I found a Blackbird’s nest containing three 
eggs in the middle of Glossop Moor. Its situation and the 
materials of which it was built would have naturally led me to 
take for granted that it belonged to a Ring-Ouzel, but I saw a 
hen Blackbird leave it, and I heard her well-known cry. 

Before leaving this part of my subject I must quote a curious 
incident from my notes for May 11th, 1895 :—‘‘ On the moorland 
path between Ramsley Lodge and Curbar I met Mr. Peat. Just 
where we met was a Grouse’s nest close to the path. It was 
peculiar-looking, being partly made of mud; and he told me its 
history as follows: A Ring-Ouzel built the nest, and began to lay 
in it. To his surprise he one day found a Grouse’s egg in the 
nest, and thought that someone had put it in for amusement ; 
but the Grouse continued to lay in it, so he removed the Ring- 
Ouzel’s eggs. To-day there were six Grouse’s eggs in the some- 
what flattened-out Ouzel’s nest.”’ 

Situation of Nest.—On the moors the usual place for the nest 
is on a sloping heathery bank, the nest being well concealed 
among the heather. It is often found near a brook, not because 
the birds prefer to be near water, but the brook has cut deep 
down into the peat, and thus has furnished a convenient slope. 
Banks by a moorland roadside, the sides of hollows, the steep 
and rugged declivities which always occur below the ‘‘ edges,’ — 
all these are taken advantage of. Once, when looking for Sand- 
Martins’ nests, I found that of a Ring-Ouzel in a sand-pit. Mr. 
Peat has never come across the nest in a tree or bush, but in 
1887 I chanced on one which was placed in a fir tree a few feet 
from the ground; and in 1895, in the same locality, my friend 
Mr. Allan R. Wilson saw one in a similar situation. He has 
kindly sent me a copy of the entry in his notes, which runs as 
follows :—“In one of the stunted trees, just the Sheffield side of 
Stanedge Pole, I found a Ring-Ouzel’s nest with four eggs about 


THE RING-OUZEL IN DERBYSHIRE. 9 


ten feet from the ground. ‘The bird stayed about, so that I had 
no difficulty in identification.” I have never known of a nest of 
this species in a bush, but St. John mentions a “low bush” as 
its ordinary site (‘Sport in Moray,’ p. 103); and I gather that 
the Rev. H. A. Macpherson regards a “stunted whin bush” as a 
not uncommon position (‘ Birds of Cumberland,’ p. 3); and Mr. 
Howard Saunders says that “stunted bushes”’ are occasionally 
chosen. In our dales the Ring-Ouzel generally chooses as a 
nesting-site a corner in a precipitous rock, sometimes in an old 
quarry. Itis usually impossible to see any vestige of the nest 
from below, and above it is generally screened from view by 
overhanging herbage. 

Colour of Eggs.—As on one occasion J mistook a typical 
boldly marked egg of a Ring-Ouzel for that of a Blackbird, being 
misled by the nest (which was built of moss and placed on the 
top of a patch of bilberry), I can hardly object to Lord Lilford’s 
statement (‘ Birds of Northamptonshire,’ vol. i. p. 101) that the 
eggs of the Ring-Ouzel “ very closely resemble some varieties of 
the Blackbird.” It is quite true that eggs of the former bird may 
be found which are hardly distinguishable from those of the latter, 
and less rarely from those of the Missel-Thrush. I also possess 
eggs of the Song-Thrush which are very like a variety of Ring- 
Ouzel’s. Altogether there are in my collection some two dozen 
varieties of these eggs, but in some cases they are not very distinct 
from one another. The typical egg has a ground colour of 
slightly greenish blue, rather paler than is usual in the Song- 
Thrush’s egg. It is boldly marked with blotches of chestnut-red, 
and fainter ones of a dull purplish colour. A distinct variety has 
the ground colour evenly tinted with very pale reddish brown, 
marked similarly to the typical egg. In some varieties the 
ground colour is greener than in the typical egg; in some it is 
very pale indeed. In some the markings are very large and bold, 
in others they are reduced to small irregular spots or freckles, 
the underlying marks often being a pale shade of chestnut-red, 
and not purplish at all. One variety is very curious. Apparently 
the ground colour is dirty white, but the whole surface of the egg 
is thickly covered with very fine freckles of rusty brown. In 
shape they are either sharply pointed at one end, long and 
bluntly pointed, perfectly oyal, or almost spherical. 


10 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Number of Eggs. — This is given variously by authors as 
‘four, seldom five’’ (Howard Saunders’s ‘ Manual,’ p. 16); 
“from four to six”? (Macgillivray’s ‘ British Birds,’ vol. 11. p. 108) ; 
“five or six” (Lilford’s ‘Birds of Northamptonshire,’ vol. 1. 
p. 101). My own experience leads to the conclusion that three, 
four, or five make up a full clutch. Of nests which I have found 
three have contained two eggs each; five, three each; fourteen, 
four each; and two, five each. There is no doubt that in the 
case of those with two eggs each the hen had not ceased laying. 
With regard to those with three eggs each, at least one lot was 
partly incubated. Unfortunately, on several occasions when I 
found young birds in nests I omitted to note down their numbers; 
but I have records of three nests each containing three young 
birds, and of two nests each with four. Ring-Ouzels’ nests are 
usually beyond the beat of the ordinary birdsnesting boy, and 
they are, moreover, as a rule, on strictly preserved land; so that 
it seems to me that three eggs may be fairly regarded as a 
normal clutch. 

In conclusion, I should like to raise my protest against the 
collecting of eggs in clutches. It may satisfy the cravings of 
mere greed, but I cannot conceive what scientific purpose is 
gained thereby. I believe that I have as good a series of Ring- 
Ouzels’ eggs as anyone can wish to possess, but it would be © 
no better scientifically if I had carried off every clutch which I 
have found. It sometimes happens that two varieties are to be 
found in one nest. Even then it is needless to take more than 
two eggs. My notes tell me how many eggs each nest contained, 
and they do this more satisfactorily than can be done by the 
keeping of clutches, individual eggs of which may get broken. In 
a public museum it may be desirable to show one clutch of each 
species, but this can hardly be necessary in a private collection. 


Cen) 


NOTES on tHe ORNITHOLOGY or OXFORDSHIRE, 
1896-1898. 


BY OOs Vs Apim, SFiE.S. 


(Concluded from vol. iii. p. 442.) 


WHeErE no other locality is mentioned, the notes refer to the 
parish of Bloxham. 

1897. 

January 12th.—Fieldfares and Redwings only just beginning 
the large crop of haws, which, almost untouched, simply redden 
the hedges. 

15th.—F lock of from two to three hundred Ring and Stock 
Doves. 

20th.—Some snow; sharp frosts lately. 

21st.—Two Redpolls. 

22nd.—Snow on ground. Large flock of Fieldfares and 
many Redwings. Large flock of Larks. 

23rd.—Very hard frost, and snow on ground. A Great Crested 
Grebe shot on the Thames at Cassington (‘Oxford Times’). 

29th.—Thaw. Three hundred and fifty brace of Partridges 
killed this season on a beat of about 4000 acres of rough ground, 
in the parishes of South Newington, Swerford, and Rollright. 
This season and last have been very good ones here; hot and 
dry summers. 

February 1st.—A vast flock of Skylarks on a stubble. News 
from Mr. Darbey of eight or ten Sheldrakes seen on floods at 
Charleton-on-Otmoor. They were very wild, but one was shot 
and sent for preservation. 

20th.—Blackbird singing well. 

23rd.—Large flock of Fieldfares. 

A Great Crested Grebe, recently shot on Port Meadow, 
reported in the ‘ Oxford Times,’ 5th March. 

Writing to me on February 6th, Mr. R. W. Calvert, of 
Ascott-under- Wychwood, says:—‘‘ At the present time I am 
acquainted with about half a dozen nesting sites of both the 
_ Barn and Long-eared Owl, all within a radius of about seven 


12 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


miles of this place. ... . On March 21st [1896] I went to 
one, a spruce plantation about two miles away from here, and 
saw a Long-eared Owl fly off her six hard-sat eggs on the top 
of a Squirrel’s nest. On April 38rd I discovered another Long- 
eared Owl’s nest with four eggs in a plantation close here.” 
These eggs and the next two clutches were taken by Rooks; 
from the fourth clutch four young were reared. Writing again 
on May 29th, the same observer mentions having seen, up to 
that date of the present season, three pairs of Long-eared Owls 
nesting. And on June 15th he wrote that he had recently seen 
four lots of young. 

March 6th.—News from Mr. Fowler that he saw a Buzzard 
at Kingham on this day. It flew in a south-easterly direction 
towards Bruern Wood, after coming nearly over his head. 
Although very high up, its flight and shape were unmistakable. 

13th.—Rooks built one nest. 

20th.— Song-Thrush’s nest with two eggs in shrubbery. 
Kighteen Rooks’ nests in the far rookery. 

26th.—Chiffchaff in song. 

One day this spring (exact date not preserved) I saw in my 
brother-in-law’s garden here a Missel-Thrush’s nest with eggs, 
placed, not more than seven feet from the ground, on and near 
the end of a slender, nearly horizontal bough of a yew tree 
which stretched to the edge of the tennis lawn. The way the 
Missel Thrush has of putting away some of its shyness in the 
breeding season and approaching our dwelling-houses to breed 
is well known. Possibly in this case the slender bough was 
chosen as being difficult of access by cats, which are the greatest 
curse that the birds of Bloxham gardens suffer from. It is 
absolutely useless to pass (and even to enforce) laws for the 
protection of small birds while no restraint is imposed upon the 
keeping of cats. Curiously enough, when I was at Rainworth the 
same year in July, Mr. Whitaker showed me a Missel-Thrush’s 
nest from which young had flown, also placed at the end of a 
yew bough extending to the edge of the croquet-ground, and 
only about four feet from the ground. Nests at these low 
elevations are, I should think, not common. 

April 11th.—Blackcap in song in shrubbery. Several Red- 
starts by the brook, 


ORNITHOLOGY OF OXFORDSHIRE. 13 


13th.—A Swallow seen at Bloxham Grove. 

15th.—A good many Willow Wrens. 

18th.— Swallows pretty common about the village. Cuckoo 
noisy. Mr. H. G. Thomson watched, through glasses, two 
immature Golden Eyes in the middle of a large field on Otmoor, 
and within a hundred yards of him. Stormy weather had then 
recently prevailed (in litt.). 

20th.—The same observer saw two Spotted Woodpeckers at 
Woodperry; he has also seen this bird in the garden there 
(in litt.). 

24th.—Otter hunting in the Cherwell Valley (when we killed 
a bitch of 17 lb.), and saw Lesser and Common Whitethroats, 
Sand Martin, and Tree Pipit. 

-25th.—Ray’s Wagtail and House Martin. 

27th.—Whinchat. 

May 2nd.—Garden Warbler. 

4th.—Sedge Warbler. 

_ 7th.—Swift and Spotted Flycatcher. 

9th.— Turtle Dove. 

17th.—Carrion Crow’s nest with four young with feathers 
just showing. 

June 4th.—Heard Corncrake; getting scarce in recent years. 

8th.—Pair of Red-backed Shrikes established at Wickham. 

13th.—A young Cuckoo in Redstart’s nest in a hole under 
the thatch coping of garden wall. Being now too large for the 
hole, its tail sticking out attracts attention. 

15th.—News from Mr. Calvert that he had up to May 10th 
seen twenty-seven new nests of the Hawfinch in Wychwood Forest, 
but all empty—the work of the Cuckoo, aided by Rooks and 
Jackdaws. 

16th.—The above Cuckoo flown. 

26th.—The Red-backed Shrikes at Wickham have a nest ina 
hazel bush in the roadside hedge, and young flown. 

28th.—Cuckoo in the fields at the back of the house still 
sings the full song. 

July 3rd.—Blackcap, which became quiet about the end of 
May, sings again now. Garden Warbler sings. 

6th.—F lycatchers with brancher young, and very noisy. 

10th.—A young Cuckoo in Robin’s nest in hole under the 


14 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


thatch coping of kitchen garden wall ; feathers only just sprouting. 
The shells of some of the Robin’s eggs lie at the foot of the wall. 

17th.—A young Cuckoo (the third this year) about the 
garden; my man says it appeared on the 15th. 

23rd.—Saw a Barred Woodpecker. The last young Cuckoo 
has emerged and frequents the garden. 

August 38rd.—A young Cuckoo still with us. 

22nd.—Many Swifts; very noisy. 

23rd.—Some Swifts. 

September 4th.—A big flock of Peewits. 

7th.—Many Missel Thrushes about the fields, in small flocks. 
I shot a very heavy Red-legged Partridge at Milcomb ; it was an 
old male, one of three very wild birds. Although in moult, and 
the spaniel in retrieving it (it was a runner) pulled out nearly all 
its tail, it weighed only a shade under 20 oz. I find that 173 oz. 
or 18 oz. is a good weight for a full-plumaged November bird. 

Partridges showing a pure white horseshoe have been much 
more common of late than was the case ten years ago. ‘hese 
birds are usually (? always) females. The following examples 
came under my own notice this year and in the previous autumn. 

Moulted young one, sex not noted down, pure white horseshoe, 
Sept. 15th, 1896. Three females killed at Milcomb and Barford, 
January 4th, 15th, and 25th, 1897, two with pure white horse- 
shoes, and the third white just marked with a few brown spots. 
Female with pure white shoe, October 15th. Female with large 
pure white shoe, November 6th. Female with small patch of 
brown on white shoe, November 9th. Another the same day, 
sex not noted, pure white shoe. Birds with the horseshoe 
chestnut and white mixed are often met with. 

12th.—A Grey Wagtail by the Sorbrook at Bodicote. 

18th.—About 8 a.m. (the sun just coming through the mist) 
a cloud of Swallows flew up above the roof in a mass, and went 
up high in the air; distinctly fewer to be seen about the village 
afterwards. 

21st.—Many Meadow Pipits (migrants) in the roots to-day 
and yesterday. 

30th.—A Turtle Dove at South Newington. 

October 13th.—A good many House Martins and only one 
Swallow. 


ORNITHOLOGY OF OXFORDSHIRE. 15 


14th.—A party of Martins high over the garden. 

23rd.—Redwings. 

31st.—Fieldfares. 

November 12th.—A Woodcock, a rare bird here, seen at 
Milcomb. 

16th.— Great flocks of Starlings. A farmer here recently 
caught a light greyish (nearly white) variety. 

19th.— Examined a Peregrine Falcon—a male of this year— 
shot near Chipping Norton early in this month. 

21st.—Missel Thrush singing lately. Grey Wagtail flew 
over the garden a few days ago. 

24th.—A good many Redwings here, but hardly any Fieldfares. 

December 23rd.—About 12.30 a.m., calm and starlight with 
a little haze, Grey Wild Geese very noisy, and apparently wheeling 
over the village, rather low down. 

24th.—A few Redwings; no Fieldfares to be seen. About a 
dozen Siskins in some alders by the brook at South Newington. 
Their note on the wing at this season sounds like tweee or 
tweeze, thin and wheezy. When settled they utter a poor thin 
twiteree or twitzeree. | 

Marsh Warbler.—My. Fowler did not find a nest at Kingham 
this year; but he felt sure there was one (if not two), for he saw 
and heard the birds‘as late as July 22nd—his latest date. 

Jays.—A copy of a publication called ‘The Gamekeeper’ 
(December 1897) came into my hands. It contains an article by 
Mr. Charles Stonebridge, head gamekeeper to the Earl of Jersey, 
upon shooting Jays at Middleton Park. ‘The writer states that, 
in one of the coverts, there is a plantation of what are locally 
called ‘‘ Spanish Oaks,’ the botanical name of which he believes 
is Quercus cerris. ‘The variety grows nowhere else on the estate, 
and seldom fails to bear a crop of acorns. In those years when 
the ordinary oak bears no fruit, Middleton is visited by a “ plague 
of Jays.” As arule there are, he says, very few Jays about the 
place, but the season of 1897 being marked by the conditions 
stated above, a swarm of Jays then appeared to feed on the 
acorns. The writer continues: ‘“‘ The strange part about it is, 
that at this time the Jays appear to drop the artful, suspicious 
ways which are characteristic of the family, and one is able to 
shoot at them all day without frightening the birds away. On 


1G? 5 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


heavy mornings, when the mist and smoke hang in the trees, 
they come just the same, and at times severely try the quickness 
of the breechloader. If one should happen to be winged, and 
falls screaming down the tree, the Jays fly in so quickly that the 
gun-barrels soon become hot in the hand. From about nine to 
ten in the morning is the time when the Jays appear to be 
feeding most freely, and it is then when myself and one of the 
under-keepers wait for them, as, having other duties to attend 
to, we are unable to spare more than an hour or so each day. 
However, in that short time we generally manage to kill a dozen 
or more. During one season a few years ago we bagged two 
hundred and fifty Jays, up till the end of October, feeding on 
these acorns. . . . The only injury they do now, is the 
manner in which their screaming annoys the Pheasants.” This 
last is a most “gamekeeperish” remark, and it would be 
curious to find out what, if any, grounds Mr. Stonebridge has 
for making such a remarkable statement. 

The tameness of the birds probably points to their connection 
with one of those immigrations of Jays to the east coast of 
England which occasionally take place, and affect Oxfordshire in 
some degree. 


1898. 


January 5th.—Many primroses and one flower of Pyrus 
japonica in bloom. 

6th.—Examined at Mr. Bartlett’s a Manx Shearwater captured 
at North End, Warwickshire, in September last. Although this 
bird occurred three or four miles outside our boundaries, it may 
not be out of place to mention it here. 


10th.—While waiting for Wood Pigeons, I watched a Barred ~ 


Woodpecker for nearly half an hour. It once uttered its loud 
qui-qui-qui-qui-qui, more commonly heard in spring, and also, 
but less so, in autumn. It is also heard in summer. ‘The 
notes of this cry are so run together as to sound like quick 
rather than gui. This bird also once uttered the alarm cry 
gik or gek. 

13th.—Snowdrops well out. 

14th.—The “dark still dry warm weather” of Gilbert White. 


ORNITHOLOGY OF OXFORDSHIRE. 17 


15th.— Two Blackbirds, old and young, had a prolonged 
running fight, with occasional halts. When they faced each 
other, one of them (at least) sang a few high-pitched shrill notes. 
19th.—A small flock of Siskins in alders at South Newington. 
20th.—Had news of many Crossbills seen in a plantation of 


spruce and larch at Wardington. 


21st.—Blackbird sang well; very early. 
22nd.—Received two Crossbills which had been shot a few 


days ago at Wardington. ‘They had been killed too long for 


yw eT 


preservation, or for the sex to be ascertained. Dusky birds with 
dark feather-centres, and the feathers of the crown and (but less 
so) mantle with yellow edges. Rump of one bird yellow; of the 
other, shot away. 

23rd.—One crocus bloom out. 

24th.—A pair of Starlings investigating a former nesting-hole 
in the roof of a thatched cottage. 

30th.—Pied Wagtail singing well. 

31lst.—Wood Pigeons numerous. I saw two or three large 
flocks; one flying to the Tew Woods late in the afternoon 
numbered three hundred at least. Jays have been rather numer- 
ous since the end of October. With few exceptions the Jay (on 
account of the absence of woods, and scarcity of even small 
plantations) in this immediate district, is an autumn visitor for 
the winter. 

February 19th.—Bullfinches made a heavy onslaught on the 
plum buds; they chose the best-flavoured plums. 

21st.—Hard frost and snow. 

22nd.—Thermometer down to 25° (at four feet from the 
ground) last night. Wind N.E. lately. 

24th.—Apricot blossom expanded. 

25th.—White frost, 25°. | 

March 2nd.—Cold and stormy for some days; daffodil in 
flower. 

3rd.—News from Mr. Darbey, of Oxford, that he received 
‘the other week”’ a particularly fine Peregrine Falcon, shot near 
Woodstock ; also that he had been told that another frequented 
the same neighbourhood. 

4th.—Frost and snow. 

9th.—Wintry weather, and N.E. winds lately. 

Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., January, 1900. c 


18 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


10th.—Sharp frost. 

18th.—Milder the last few days. 55° in the day, in shade. 

21st.—Frost again. 

24th.—Strong N. wind and snow. 

26th.—It has blown hard from N. and N.N.E. for three days; 
some snow. Starlings building in hole over the granary door. 

27th.— Wind moderated, with rain. Much peach and apricot 
blossom strewn on the ground. [Yet from one apricot tree I 
afterwards thinned out over one hundred green fruit, and gathered 
one hundred and twenty ripe fruit. | 

April 1st.—The first Chiffchaff appeared; in song, in the 
garden. I searched carefully in the most likely spots without 
finding one earlier. 

7th.—Some (unknown) bird has in the last few days attacked 
my black currant bushes, biting off the fruit buds and eating 
them, although the leaves (many of which are strewn on the 
ground) are as large as a shilling. I have never known this 
happen before. We prevented further destruction by stretching 
black cotton about the trees. And I may now add, that this done 
early in the next season (1899) probably prevented a repetition 
of the damage to the bushes. 

8th.—Good Friday. Saw a Swallow about the buildings at 
Bloxham Grove. 

12th.—Several Willow Wrens in the garden. Redstart. 

17th.—Cuckoo. 

18th.—Swallows about the garden (the first on the 15th). 

20th.—Blackcap and Lesser Whitethroat. 

23rd.—Tree Pipit. Otter hunting in the Cherwell below 
Kings Sutton. Killed a dog and bitch of 18 lb. and 16 lb. 

26th.—Sedge Warbler. As I passed in the train I saw a 
Coot on its nest on a piece of water on the east side of the 
G.W.R. near Wolvercot. Examined (and afterwards bought) a 
nice red Crossbill, one of four received from Buckland in 
December, 1897. Buckland is just inside Berkshire. Heard a 
Nightingale at Wolvercot. 

30th.—House Martin. 

May lst.—Whinchat, Whitethroats, Wryneck, and Grass- 
hopper Warbler. Banal 

2nd.—Garden Warbler in shrubbery. Two or three Swifts. - 


ORNITHOLOGY OF OXFORDSHIRE. 19 


A Song Thrush sang from my barn roof ridge this afternoon. 
Rather a wet day. 

4th.—The Lesser Whitethroat sings nearly every day in a 
bird-cherry tree (Prunus padus), the branches of which come 
close to some of the windows. I can thus listen to the song at 
very close quarters. The bird sings at pretty regular intervals. 
His warbling notes, which precede the outburst, are sometimes 
really very good and rich, but low in tone and not very numerous— 
often hurried, so that at a distance they are often not heard. 
They vary a good deal, and occasionally, in style, remind one of 
the notes of the Orphean Warbler. In these cases they might 
be set down as therut therut therut; but this kind of prelude is 
rarely heard, and the notes are usually of a warbling nature. 

7th.—On April 15th I set up in the shrubbery a nesting-box 
made out of a piece of an old pump-—the fondness of ‘Tits for apump 
as a nesting site being well known. A pair of Greater Titmice had 
completed a nest in it by the 30th. On the morning (about 
10.30 a.m.) of May Ist Mr. A. H. Macpherson and I looked into 
it and found it empty. On the 4th I saw the bird on the nest, 
and to-day the nest contained eight eggs. Even supposing an 
egg was laid on the Ist, after we looked into the nest, the bird 
must have laid two eggs in one day. 

14th.—Found a Jay’s nest with five eggs in a thorn bush in 
a small ash-pole spinney at South Newington. The Jay rarely 
breeds here. ‘Turtle Dove. 

15th.—Heard the resonant notes of the Wryneck, now a rare 
bird here, from this house. Several Spotted Flycatchers appeared 
in the garden for the first time this year. ‘They were fighting 
and pairing. A pair of Wrens whose nest was torn by a Cat 
from an ivy-grown stem, are building again in the same spot. I 
imagine it is the same pair. : 

18th.— Starling feeding young. 

27th.—F lycatchers have one egg in a nest built in half a 
cocoanut-shell fixed under the eaves of a wall. A Nightingale 
established at Bloxham Grove. 

June lst to 15th—In Belgium. 

20th.—Mr. H. G. Thompson saw a white variety among a 
flock of Starlings near Headington. 

23rd.—Cuckoo still sings. Examined at Mr. Bartlett’s a 


@ 2 


20 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Shag, just beginning to moult old worn feathers, which was 
picked up in a very thin condition in a meadow near Banbury 
about the 1st of the month. 

25th.—Went to Kingham to see the three Marsh Warbler’s 
nests found by Mr. Fowler. A photograph of one of these nests 
(the one in which the Cuckoo’s egg was afterwards found, vide 
‘Zoologist,’ 1898, p. 356) is here reproduced. This example 


sg a a By ote ; = =. oad 


exhibits very well the peculiar characteristic (always more or less 
developed, so far as I know) of the Marsh Warbler’s nest. The 
nest has the appearance of being hung on its supporting stems 
by basket-lke handles, somewhat similar to those of a common 
garden scuttle-basket. This nest is supported by three stems of 
meadow-sweet, two of them close together. ‘The walls of the 
nest are formed of dry. grass, with a very little moss and some 
wool. The lining consists of a fair amount of horsehair, and a 
very little wool is to be seen, as well as a patch of the latter as 


ORNITHOLOGY OF OXFORDSHIRE. 21 


big as a threepenny-bit in the bottom of the nest (vide 1898, 
p 357). The second nest was supported by two stems of meadow- 
sweet (a third stem was only attached to the nest slightly). It 
had very well developed ‘“‘ handles’ coming up high above the 
general level of the walls. The walls were entirely of dead grass, 
and the lining of horsehair. The third nest was supported by 
two stems of meadow-sweet and one of osier. The “handles ” 
were well defined, but slight and small. Walls of dead grass; 
lining of horsehair. The three sets of eggs were each of a 
different type, though the individual eggs in the clutches re- 
sembled one another. Mr. Fowler has presented the first nest, 
with the Cuckoo’s egg, to the Oxford Museum. 

29th.—-Mr. Fowler and I saw a male Red-backed Shrike and 
an impaled Bumble Bee near Lower Tadmarton. 

July 2nd.— Cuckoo singing full and well this morning; heard 
from the garden. 

4th.—Two Cuckoos still in full song, one at the back of the 
garden, the other near South Newington. __ 

§th.—Cuckoo still in full song. Starlings very destructive 
to my neighbour’s ripe cherries. Weather dry. 

6th.—The Lesser Whitethroat may be heard not uncommonly 
singing in this and other gardens in the village throughout its 
period of song. It is much more of a garden bird than the 
Greater Whitethroat, which only appears in the village and about 
gardens on its first arrival (and that very rarely), and again 
(commonly) in the bush-fruit season. Lesser Whitethroat is 
indeed an unfortunate and, in some respects, a misleading name. 
The habit of this species of frequenting gardens, rather than open 
spots like the Whitethroat, was remarked upon by Edward Blyth 
sixty years ago, as well as by Herbert at a rather earlier date. 

9th.—A Cuckoo in full song all the morning in the fields at 
the back of this garden. The old idea locally is that the Cuckoo’s 
voice becomes broken when it can no longer get little birds’ eggs 
to wet its throat with; hence it changes its tune in June. An 
ingenious man once suggested, to account for a Cuckoo singing 
in July, that each bird has a certain number of cuckoos,to get 
through, and if he had not finished them by the usual time he 
had to go on after the other birds had finished ! 

15th, — Very dry weather. Starlings, Blackbirds, Song 


22 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Thrushes, and Robins punishing the raspberries and red 
currants. 

18th.—A young Robin caught to-day was half through its 
moult, and had a good patch of red on its breast. I saw another 
showing this a few days earlier. The heaviest hay crop for 
twenty-nine years; and “got well.” 

20th.—Saw a female Red-backed Shrike on the Lessor Farm, 
Milcomb. 

22nd.—Chiffchaff still sings. 

_ 80th.—A good many Willow Wrens about the trees, plants, 
and pea rows in the garden, taking small flies, &c., during the 
last few days. 

831st.—Several Robins singing. All those that I can see well 
are young birds over the moult. Spotted young are still to be 
seen. Great numbers have been reared this year, and I have 
liberated as many as three from the Sparrow-trap in a morning. 
Most of them will leave us in autumn. Pied Wagtail on the 
roof of an outbuilding. with food in its mouth, and probably 
feeding a second brood, as there were big young on the lawn 
some time ago. 

August 3rd.—A young Cuckoo about the garden lately. Was 
this the progeny of the old Cuckoo which sang so late in the 
season close to the garden? And was the old bird hanging 
about until the young one was safely launched ? I did not find 
a Cuckoo’s egg in the garden this year, but I have no doubt this 
young one (which had evidently only just left the nest) was 
hatched with us. 

13th.—Many Swifts, high up and noisy, in evening. Two 
Red-backed Shrikes on the telegraph wires on the Lessor Farm. 

14th.—No Swifts to be seen. 

15th.—The drought is very severe ; apples and plums falling 
unripe from the trees. 

September Ist. — Chiffchaff singing again. The hottest 
September I ever knew. A bad season for Partridges here, 
taking into consideration the large stock left at the end of last 
seasone Barren birds numerous, but what coveys there are being 
good on the average. A dry season is usually good for the birds, 
but apparently it can be too dry, and I believe that this year 
many young birds died from want of water. It is on the dry 


ORNITHOLOGY OF OXFORDSHIRE. 23 


hilly land this year that birds are scarcest; while the contrary 
is usually the case with us. 

2nd.—Chiffchaff in song. Saw a Wheatear in two places 
near South Newington. 

5th.—The cracks in the ground are larger than any I have 
seen since the dry summer of 1867 (or 8), which I remember 
being pointed out to me as the probable grave of many young 
Partridges. Straggling flocks of Missel Thrushes seen every 
day almost this month, so far. It is a curious thing that during 
the late autumn and winter the Missel Thrush can hardly be 
called a gregarious bird in England, and that we do not see 
flocks after early autumn. In winter the Missel Thrush is seen 
singly, or, at the most, three or four together, until early spring 
when it pairs. I think this bird was more common here when I 
was a boy, judging from recollections of nests found in apple 
orchards and the fork of forest trees—an ash for choice; judging 
also from the birds shot with Fieldfares in hard weather in the 
thorn and other berried trees. Those who were accustomed to 
shoot Fieldfares as they came to feed in the thorn bushes, hated 
the ‘‘ Norman,” as it is called here; for if one arrived in a bush 
where the Felts were gathering, it straightway began to swear 
with its harsh screaming voice, and to fight, and so drove the 
other birds away, causing the hoped-for family shot to fade away. 
A Landrail bagged. Only a few seen this season; but I did not 
expect any, as I do not think I heard one in the summer. Mr. 
H. G. Thomson wrote me word that in the neighbourhood of 
Woodperry they had been conspicious by their absence. In 
1897 also they were rare with us. A Wheatear seen. 

7th.—For the first time the oppressive heat quite overcame us 
this afternoon. ‘lhe thermometer stood at 70° after 7 p.m. 

8th.—Temperature in the shade 84° at 1 p.m. 

9th.—Have shot this month Partridges with the horseshoe 
pure white (two females); white with a few chestnut feathers; 
mixed ; and pure chestnut. I made this note in consequence of 
a suggestion in the ‘ Field’ newspaper that this white shoe was a 
“stage” in the change of plumage. This is of course a wrong idea. 
But it seems likely that the pure white horseshoe is almost 
confined to the female Partridge, if, indeed, it is not entirely so, 

11th.—Chiffchaff sings well, 


24 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


18th.—Flock of Peewits on swedes. 

16th.—Drought still continues. News that Mr. G. Colegrave 
has seen one Quail this year, and that Mr. E. Colegrave heard 
one in the spring at Milcomb. 

17th.—My garden is nearly deserted by birds (on account of 
the dry weather). Caterpillars (Pieris brassice) swarm on the 
cabbage tribe, but the birds do not touch them. As for the 
Sparrows, not one is seen about my garden and the outbuildings ; 
they are all away in the cornfields. 

21st.—Very dry; about 75°. Still many Missel Thiastieess in 
loose flocks. 

22nd.—The bulk of the village Swallows gone. 

23rd.—The caterpillars of Pieris brassice having eaten all the 
green from a considerable quantity of the cabbage tribe in a large 
garden near here (leaving an array of skeletons), went over the’ 
wall in swarms, and across the village street, the people on the 
other side having to shut windows and doors to keep them out of 
their houses. The side walk was covered with caterpillars, 
crushed under foot by the passers-by. I may here add that 
during the winter of 1898-9, green vegetables were scarcer in 
the village than they had been for very many years. Drought 
and blight partly accounted for this. My own plants were only 
saved from caterpillars by hand-picking. Whether it is that 
there are now so many more insects which are “nasty ”’ to birds, 
or whether the birds have changed their habits and got into bad 
ways in the matter of their food, I cannot say. But it is certain 
that, although ordinary small birds (except Swallows and Martins) 
are commoner than ever, they seem year by year less able, or less 
willing, to cope with the insect pests of the garden. Began apple 
gathering in the orchard; an early date. 

26th.—Thermometer down to 35° last night. Hot sun but 
cold air from the E. and a slight whirlwind about midday. 

27th.—Showers. Song Thrush sang in a low and subdued 
tone; the notes very poor. 

28th.—Country and grass fields perhaps never before in my 
experience so brown, dried up, and dusty. 

29th.—The drought broke up and a good rain fell. We have 
met with only three or four Landrails this year, and I have 
heard of some half dozen others, 


ORNITHOLOGY OF OXFORDSHIRE. 25 


October 8rd.—A young well-grown female Partridge nearly 
over the moult, with white horseshoe. 

5th.—A good many Jays about. 

9th.—A Grey Wagtail in the brook here. Alarm note in 
flight is a highly-pitched sharp and very hard itch-it or ttch-it-tit, 
uttered quickly. 

10th.—Many Meadow Pipits in loose flocks and singly in 
swede fields. Lark sang poorly. 

12th.—Redwings about hedges. Many Meadow Pipits again. 
Lark sang. 

15th.—Some Swallows hawking flies round a big oak at 
Wickham. A Woodcock seen on Bloxham Grove. 

29th.—The ‘Field’ to-day contained an announcement by 
Mr. W. W. Fowler that Mr. W. C. Carnegie saw a Swift at 
Churchill in company with a large number of House Martins on 
the 15th inst. This is a record late date for Oxon. Swifts were 
recorded as seen this month at Edinburgh, Bath, and in the Isle 
of Wight. 

3lst.—Song Thrush singing well. We have now only our 
(comparatively) few winter Robins. Mr. H. G. Thomson saw 
three Grey Crows flying over from north to south at Woodperry 
on the 23rd. 

November 1st.—Fieldfares passed over my garden ‘‘chacking.”’ 

4th.— When pike-fishing at Byfield Reservoir, Northampton- 
shire, not far over the Oxfordshire boundaries, I saw no fewer than 
three Cormorants, which I was told had been there for about ten 
days. One bird was fully adult, and another quite immature. They 
passed most of their time sitting on the mud edge (the water being 
very low), occasionally hanging their wings out to dry, but I saw 
one busily fishing. The shots of a Snipe-shooter alarmed them 
considerably in the forenoon, and they took wing, circling round 
at a great height, and I thought they had gone for good. But 
they soon returned, and I afterwards learned that they were in 
the habit of visiting Clattercote Reservoir, in Oxon, occasionally 
remaining there for the night, and roosting in some tall elms on 
the bank. I think they remained about six weeks in the 
neighbourhood. 

As my man was walking up the shrubbery to-day, a hawk 
dashed at a small bird, The latter dropped through some lilacs, 


26 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


and the Hawk following hit against a bough and lay stunned on 
the ground for several seconds. 

6th.—Weather still very mild. Twenty-eight different plants 
in bloom in the garden. 

19th.—Heard Redwings’ notes overhead, at intervals, about 
9 p.m.; rather foggy, calm, with wind N.E. to E. 

21st.—Many Redwings and Fieldfares; these remained in 
good numbers all the winter. 

22nd.—A female Partridge—a bird of the year, I believe— 
with pure white horseshoe. Very cold. N.N.W. wind. 

23rd.—A Woodcock shot out of gorse on a hillside at Mil- 
comb. News from Mr. Fowler that he saw half a dozen Cross- 
bills in the parks at Oxford, on the 22nd. These birds have 
been numerous this year in various parts of England. Deep 
snow on the ground this morning, and more fell in the forenoon, 
about five inches on the ground; but thawing. 

28th.—Cold winds lately. Obtained an immature Barred 
Warbler (Sylvia nisoria) here. (Vide ‘ Ibis,’ 1899, p. 160.) 

December 11th.—Missel Thrush’s joyous rollicking song. 

19th.—Very mild again. Violets, pansies, and primroses 
blooming; also wallflower and alpine wallflower, to a small 
extent. Our tortoise has foolishly emerged from a covering of 
leaves and earth at the foot of a bending wall just where it faces 
south-west—the spot it selected to lay up in. 

20th.—Frosty for a few days. 

28th.— Winter aconite in full bloom. 

Mr. H. G. Thomson reports Wild Ducks, Wigeon, and 
Teal, plentiful this winter on Otmoor, owing to large floods. 
But wildfowl are not so plentiful there as in former years. 
Mr. Surman received a Cormorant from the neighbourhood of 
Witney this month; and he tells me he had one from Headington 
(Quarry in the winter of 1896-7. 


The following fragments of the history of two birds once 
found commonly in Oxfordshire may be worth preserving. 

When I was at Kingham, in 1892, I interviewed Mr. Tom 
Phipps, aged sixty-three, who had been postboy and postman for 
fifty years. He had an excellent and accurate memory, was fond 
of recalling the former condition of Kingham parish (then 


ORNITHOLOGY OF OXFORDSHIRE. 27 


much more wooded than it is now), and of birds and beasts. 
About thirty years before 1892, Tom Barnes (nephew of John 
Barnes, the old keeper, who would have been then over ninety if 
living), who afterwards went to New Zealand, saw a Kite feeding on 
a Crow in Bruern Wood, but failed to shoot it for Phipps. I wish 
now that he had succeeded, for Phipps would without doubt have 
preserved it to this day. This was the last that either of them 
heard of the Kite. But Phipps’s father took a Kite’s nest in 
Bledington Heath Wood, probably eighty years earlier, for it was 
when he was a boy or young man, and he would have been over a 
hundred years old if living then. 

Mr. R. W. Calvertt was told, in 1897, by one Curtiss, of 
Charlbury, former gardener to the late Dowager Lady Churchill, 
at the Ranger’s Lodge, Wychwood Forest, that Kites were quite 
common down to about the year 1850. Although he never took 
any interest in birds, yet he knew the Kite and its forked tail. 

It was about fifty years since om Phipps saw a Raven. He 
was, as a little boy (of ten or twelve), “leasing ’”’ in a field on the 
Churchill side of Kingham, when a bird, looking like a great 
Crow, flew over, calling, in a deep hoarse low voice, ‘‘ cork cork 
corrk,” and the women in the field looked up and said: ‘* Look at 
the Raven; there will be sure to be someone die at Kingham, for 
he is calling ‘ corpse corpse corpse.’”’ 

Mr. George Wise told me, in 1891, that about fifty years 
earlier, he went with his father up to Tusmore Park in a donkey 
cart. While they were inspecting some sheep in a pen, a pair of 
* oreat old Ravens” came out of Tusmore Wood, and flew over 
the pen. They were the last he ever saw. ‘They were, he said, 
bigger than Gor Crows. Mr. Wise is noted for a wonderfully 
sood memory. He does not know the Kite, which, owing to the 
lack of woods, probably became extinct in this district long 
before it died out in the wooded parts of Oxon. But years 
ago I have heard ploughboys speak of the ‘“ Kite-Hawk,”’ 
bestowing the name on the Sparrow-Hawk. And in the same 
way Mr. Wise speaks of the ‘“‘ Buzzard Hawk” and Sparrow 
Hawk, when he means the Sparrow-Hawk and Kestrel. The 
names, in fact, survive long after any recollection or tradition of 
the birds they really belong to. I once heard a man call a large 
female Sparrow Hawk a ‘“‘ Hare Harrier.” The ‘ Hawk and 


28 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Partridge’ inn, at Bloxham, has a very old signboard, painted 
many years ago (sixty or seventy, at least, as far as I can 
ascertain). It represents a very large Hawk striking at a fat 
Partridge standing placidly in the middle of a field. A very old 
keeper once described Harriers to me most accurately, and he 
called them ‘‘ Partridge Hawks ”’ (vide ‘ Birds of Oxon,’ p. 34). 


( 29°) 


ON THE MOULT AND COLOUR CHANGES OF 
THE CORNCRAKE (CREX PRATENSIS). 


By J. L. Bonuore. 


Havine for several years successfully kept, and on one 
occasion* bred, the Corncrake (Crex pratensis) in confinement, 
and having also had several wild caught specimens through my 
hands during the same period, the following results of my 
observations on the moult and colour change of this species 
may prove of some interest. In common with many other birds, 
the Corncrake has two moults in the year, the chief one taking 
place in July and August, as soon as the breeding season is over, 
and involving a change of every feather; the other taking place in 
February, while they are still in their winter quarters, and 
involving a change of all the feathers except the tail and wing 
quills, In the autumn moult the primaries and secondaries in 
both sexes are thrown off s¢emultaneously, and for about ten days 
the birds are totally incapable of flight. On two occasions I 
have had wild birds brought in which had been captured when in 
this condition. 

The males can be easily distinguished from the females 
during the swmmer months, as the breast, neck, and sides of the 
head are during that time of a delicate slaty grey colour. The 
plumage of the female hardly differs throughout the year. 

At the autumn moult, however, the males lose the slate- 
colour on the breast and neck, and assume a plumage similar to 
that of the females. 

The plumage assumed after the spring moult is precisely 
sumilar in both sexes to that which has just been discarded; in 
the male, however, the feathers on the breast and head, as soon 
as they are fully grown, begin to assume, by a change of colour, 
the bluish tinge of the breeding-season dress, and, as summer 


** See Zool., 5th ser., vol. i., p. 35. 


50 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


advances, the edgings of these feathers in both sexes wear off 
by abrasion. 

A change somewhat similar to this is found in the Great 
Northern Diver (Colymbus glacialis), and probably in other 
species as well. It is comparatively difficult to procure an 
individual of C. glacialis in full winter plumage (as described by 
Mr. Cecil Smith in his ‘Birds of Somerset,’ p. 540), which 
resembles somewhat that of the immature birds; for as soon as 
the feather is formed, or even while growing, it commences, by a 
change of colour in the feather itself, to assume the distinguish- 
ing features of the breeding plumage for the following year ; it is 
therefore possible to find in the same individual worn feathers 
of last year’s breeding-dress, new feathers that have not yet 
changed but are of a uniform bluish grey, and those which have 
already by change of colour assumed the white spots and dark 
ground of the next year’s breeding dress. 

Returning to the Corncrake, the similarity of the moult in 
both sexes, with the subsequent although practically simul- 
taneous assumption of the breeding plumage by the male, tends 
to show that, in this instance, the reason of the moult is not for 
the assumption of the breeding dress, for in that case it ought 
only to be undergone by the male. ‘The evidence before us 
seems to point to the fact that the moult has no connection with 
the colour-change, but is due to some ulterior cause of which we 
are at present ignorant. 

The method by which this change of colour is brought about 
is very hard to determine, but the following notes of a micro- 
scopical examination of feathers in process of change, taken 
from a living bird a few minutes before examination, may be of 
interest. 

If a feather be taken which is fully grown and in process of 
changing, and be microscopically examined by transmitted light, 
with a low power of about 66 diameters (with a higher power it 
was difficult to get satisfactory results by reflected light), we find 
that, whether the part of the feather be blue or brown, there is 
absolutely no difference in the arrangement of the rami or radii, 
and that both are opaque and show no colour. If these same 
parts be then examined by reflected light, the brownish part 
appears dull, the. rami and radii being both of a light-brown 


be Pome. 


MOULT AND COLOUR CHANGES OF CORNCRAKE. 31 


colour, but the radii considerably darker ; the rami on the bluish 
part appear bright and of a whitish colour, while the radii are 
clear and apparently colourless. 

Lastly, we may briefly consider the order in which the 
feathers come on the nestling. The first feathers show them- 
selves when the bird is about three days old, and are those which 
immediately surround the ear, about six in number on each side. 
Next come the two ventral tracts, beginning at their lower end 
and gradually stretching up the neck. ‘hese are followed by the 
_scapulars and tracts over the thighs, which in turn are almost 
immediately followed by the dorsal tract. This tract arises 
simultaneously over the greater part of its length, and then 
spreads both upwards and downwards. ‘The remainder of the 
smal] feathers on the head, legs, and vent are the next to grow, 
and finally, after a short interval, the primaries, secondaries, and 
tail quills, foilowed by their coverts. 

The young birds are able to fly about seven weeks after 
hatching ; they are similar in plumage to the female, but the 
brown edgings to the feathers of the back are much broader; 
they do not moult till the following February, when they assume 
the adult dress in a similar manner to their parents. 


o2 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


STRAY NOTES ON MIMICRY. 
By Gao A. WITCHELL. 


Pror. Newron’s limitation of mimicry to the status of 
unconscious resemblance (cf. Zool. 1899, p. 529) is in accord | 
with that prevailing tone of thought which denies to the lower 
animals the power of abstract reasoning so constantly evident in 
man. I hope that Mr. Distant will not conclude his: highly 
interesting treatment of the mimetic faculty without some refer- 
ence to vocal mimicry,* for this demonstrates (as it would seem, 
beyond dispute) the occurrence of a desire on the part of certain 
animals to do something that another animal is doing or has 
done, solely for the purpose of mimicking it. The Parrot is a 
common instance; but the Starling is, I think, a better one, 
since the studies of the latter bird are purely voluntary, and have 
no possible reference to the furnishing of a supply of food by a 
human owner. ‘The Sedge-Warbler, with its construction of 
novel strains by the repetition of some notes of other birds in a 
set order, is another instance of a bird exhibiting a voluntarily 
exercised mimetic faculty. If a bird’s mimicry is unconscious, 
then all its other actions may be unconscious, and the creature an 
automaton, which is absurd, except on the hypothesis that man 
also is one. But we must not hastily assume that similarity of 
action indicates mimicry; it may suggest inheritance as the 
governing factor. ‘l'ake the case of the hissing of nesting birds. 
The hissing of these birds seems generally to be the ultimate 
expression of hate and rage,t and to have no intended reference 
or similarity to that great enemy of the nest—the snake ; for a 
bird will hiss when on the nest, and at no other time, and which 
has yet never seen a snake, or, apparently, never heard a hiss: 
such is a town-bred fowl or duck. The Blue Tit, again, hisses 

* This has been referred to. Cf. Zool. 1889, p. 476.—Ep. 

I have everywhere noticed that in expressing rage birds tend to revert 


to generic cries. Young children, in the same mental trouble, perform some 
Monkey-like actions, and utter cries like those of Monkeys. 


STRAY NOTES ON MIMICRY. 33 


on the nest; but, so far as I can ascertain, this bird has never 
yet been heard to mimic the note of even another genus, and 
still less would it be likely to reproduce the note of a reptile, 
and a note which probably it had never once heard. For Snakes 
do not hiss, as birds sing, for amusement or occupation. Pro- 
bably they never hiss at all, except in combat. ‘This is at least 
true of the Common Snake (natrix), and the Viper (berus), 
both of which I have had (numbers of them) in captivity. The 
Common Snake, even when the sexes unite, utters no audible 
vocal sound, and, when angry with another of its species, it only 
Shakes or rattles its tail a little; and the Viper seems to be 
equally silent. Both of these animals make much more noise by 
their rustling through herbage than by their vocal efforts, except 
on the special occasion of combat. I have seen the Common 
Snake feed, say, a thousand times, and never heard a hiss from it 
then, though sometimes there would be a slight expulsion of air, 
causing a sound like a little coughing, while a Newt or fish was 
being swallowed. The Blue Tit must therefore be as ignorant as 
a cockney fowl, so far as the hissing of Snakes is concerned. 

The hissing of birds would therefore seem to be an inherited 
expression of rage, derived from a very remote ancestry. 

With regard to butterflies perching in positions where they 
are inconspicuous (Zool. 1899, p. 230), I have often observed 
that the Common Blues are fond of sleeping not only on grass- 
stems (as recorded by Mr. Cornish), but also on the dead and dry 
seed-heads of plants, on which they are not noticeable. I have a 
note of once finding quite a number of Blues (eight or nine; the 
MS. is not with me) sleeping at evening on one small dead 
flower-head, which they would never have noticed in the sunny 
hours of day. 

A Peacock Butterfly (Vanessa io) that lived one summer in a 
garden where I was at Stroud, spent the day at one side of the 
garden amongst the flowers, and at evening, or when the weather 
darkened, it entered the shelter of an upper branch on the shady 
side of a cypress tree on the other side of the garden, and amongst 
the black stems the insect was wholly invisible. At other times 
it never alighted on a cypress. The Peacock does not always 
choose such a dormitory. I have generally found it prefer the 
overhanging ledges of banks. The Red Admiral (V. atalanta) I 

Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., January, 1900. D 


54 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


have seen retire to the branch of a beech tree at evening, and in 
this case also the colour of the insect in repose was similar to 
that of its support. 

At Ceres, South Africa, I noticed that some of the grass 
insects, looking like bits of grass (they were seen in March), always 
alighted on the stems in such a way that they seemed to form part 
of the plant; they never posed at right angles to the stems, in 
which case they would have been less obscured by their environ- 
ment. 

I have observed two instances of what seemed to be an 
accurate idea of the advantage of similarity of colouring in relation 
to a bird and its environment. On a warm day in winter [ 
noticed a curious Robin-like bird in a hedge, and tried to identify 
it by means of the telescope; but it kept its back toward me, and 
this was practically inconspicuous in the hedge. ‘The bird was 
quite at ease, for it occasionally flew to the ground or elsewhere 
to catch an insect. Soon it was clear that the bird did not wish 
me to see its breast. At last, after quite a quarter-hour of 
following and circling round it (in the most careful manner), I 
saw the bird’s breast, and was able to identify a female Stonechat. 
I do not suggest that it wished to be mistaken for a Robin, but 
that 1t knew that its back, in that situation, was less noticeable 
than the breast, though this had sober colouring. 

The other instance was much more definite and conclusive. 
In the garden at Stroud, in winter, we fed the birds on a small 
grass-plot near the house, from which a bank sloped up into the 
shade of two yew trees. ‘The Thrushes, when disturbed feeding, 
generally ran up this bank or flew up into the trees, which spread 
at some six feet above the ground. One day, going out with food, 
I noticed a wounded Thrusk which had been feeding there for 
some days. It ran a little way up the bank, and I carefully 
avoided alarming it. It only ran half-way up the bank, and then 
squatted down in a little hollow ; not with its back toward me, 
but with its breast to me, and with the head raised considerably, 
so that the beak was almost vertical. The speckled breast and 
under side of the neck were practically all of it that I could see, 
and they were of so much the colour of the surrounding rubbly 
soil that for a moment I could not discover the bird when I 
looked for it. The tail, 1 could see, was pressed quite against 


STRAY. NOTHS ON MIMICRY. 35 


the steep bank, so that the bird was not in a very comfortable 
posture. The Thrush does not habitually turn its breast toward 
an observer, and in this case the reason for the behaviour of the 
bird hardly needs arguing. I was certainly not more than twelve 
feet from it. : 

With regard to physical mimicry generally, I would suggest 
(at the risk of ridicule) that there may be some occult influence 
causing animals to resemble things that they like, be those things 
mates or surrounding substances. I am aware that the sexual 
passion is not credited with this effect, but we know that breeders 
of prize poultry are careful to keep their male birds from running 
with birds not of the same variety, because if they do they will 
“throw” feathers like those of their companions. I have seen 
this occur in a well-bred East Indian drake that ran with a white 
Duck, and in a Black Hamburgh that ran with other fowls. 

I have also noticed some curious evidence among people. A 
man who went to a colony early in life, and had control of many 
people of colour, and who would not be likely to be particular, 
afterwards married an exceedingly good-looking and quite strong 
Englishwoman. The first child, a son, was very like a black in 
all except colour, and yet he resembled his father. The next 
child had only a faint trace of the same odd resemblance, and the 
younger children were distinctly handsome. One has quite a 
reputation for good looks. 

[am aware that this suggestion is not scientific, but if a bird 
throws unusual feathers after having shown a partiality for a 
Strange bird, why should it not throw an unusual feather when it 
finds that a certain tree or a stone saves it from a Hawk? ‘The 
dread of an enemy is a more constant sentiment than the love for 
a mate. 

The so-called feigning of death seems to me to have no 
relation to mimicry, but to an exaggeration of that stillness which 
SO many animals adopt to avoid observation. ‘This stillness may 
often be seen to be directly proportionate to the imminence of the 
danger threatened. I used to witness a very clear demonstration 
of this in the Stickleback (Gasterosteus leiwrus), When suddenly 
alarmed these fishes held themselves curved, the more readily to 
dart away ; but they seemed unable to remain in this position long, 
and yet they would then retreat not by a slow movement, but by 

B2 


36 THE ZOOLOGIST, 


sudden darts alternated with periods of stillness, as though they 
well knew that in movement they were the more visible, and that 
quick movement was the least likely to be detected. The usual 
mode of escaping notice when approached slowly is to remain 
still, lying straight. If the danger be not pressing, the fins and 
tail are still moved a little, in the customary way; but on the 
threat of greater peril these members are held motionless; and 
in still greater danger even the movement of the gills in respira- 
tion is so restricted as hardly to be visible, even from the distance 
of a foot. These gradations of stillness are successively adopted 
even though the aggressor be but another Stickleback ; and this 
especially occurs when a female fish is hoping to escape the notice 
of an approaching pugnacious male. 

The Viviparous Lizard (Lacerta vivipara), wild or tame, has a 
similar appreciation of stillness, and of the advantage of rapid 
movement in retreat; and this reptile, like the fish, will refrain 
from breathing in order to escape detection. I have had perhaps 
hundreds of these reptiles in captivity, and have often crept up 
to them while they basked on their native banks, and watched 
their movements. The movement of the lungs in breathing is 
very apparent at the shoulders. 

I have seen the feigning of death by two Ringed Snakes (T'ropi- 
donotus natriz) only out of a hundred or more handled. These 
were the only two I ever recaptured after liberation—one after a 
fortnight’s liberty in the garden, and the other after nine months’ 
freedom in his native haunt. ‘These, on recapture, behaved in 
the same manner. ‘The whole reptile became utterly limp; the 
tongue protruded, and the filaments at the end united (as they 
never are in life), and there was no hissing or apparent breathing. 
I never saw a Lizard feign death, nor any Batrachian. 


(, 3%) 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


AVES. 


Black Redstart at Brighton.—On Dec. 11th I noticed a Black Red- 
start (Ruticilla titys) clinging to the wall behind our hospital. It remained 
about Kemp Town the next few days, as I saw it several times before being 
_ shot and preserved to establish the fact of its occurrence. It is a nice bird, 
with good feathers, very little worn.— Cares H. Bryant (Sussex County 
Hospital, Brighton). 

P.S.—I have seen this morning (Dec. 18th) another Black Redstart, 
probably a companion of the one I secured.—C. H. B. 


“Chiffchaff building on the top of small Yew and Box Trees.” 
Correction.—In my note on the nesting of the Chiffchaff and Willow-Wren 
in ‘The Zoologist,’ December, 1899, p. 556, please read ‘the Chiffchaff 
with us always breeds off the ground” instead of “on the ground.”— 
H. Nosie (Temple Combe, Henley-on-Thames). 


Rose-coloured Starling in Co. Mayo.—On the 5th of last November 
_ a fine specimen of this rare visitor (Pastor roseus) to Ireland was shot by 
Mr. James A. Knox, at Belgariff House, near Foxford, as it was feeding by 
itself on the lawn, It was not in very good plumage, for some feathers on 
the back of its neck were not fully grown, nor had the long tail-feathers 
attained their full length. This is the third specimer obtained in Ireland 
this year. Mr. D. C. Campbell, of Londonderry, noticing, in the August 
number of the ‘ Irish Naturalist,’ 1898, a specimen having been procured on 
June 9th by Mr. John Hunter near Inch in that county, and Mr. Williams, 
of Dublin, in the ‘Irish Naturalist ’ for October, 1898, records the capture 
of a specimen on July 20th by Mr. A. Brooke in his garden near Killy- 
begs, Co. Donegal.—Rosert WaRREN (Moyview, Ballina). 


The Rook (Corvus frugilegus) in Scotland,—It is well known that 
this species has been prominently under notice for some time, and it is 
believed that the birds have increased greatly within the last few years, and 
as a consequence that much mischief was being done to crops by them. By 
some at least the fact of their great economic value in eating up many pests 
seemed to be practically lost sight of. An article appeared in the ‘ Trans- 
actions’ of the Highland Agricultural Society, by which it was demon- 


38 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


strated that the Rooks which were examined were practically living by 
marauding grain instead of eating up noxious grubs, insects, &c. All this 
led to various movements for destroying a portion of these birds in various 
parts of the kingdom. Shooting parties went to the rookeries for many 
hours, keeping up one continuous fusillade both by night and day, not only 
to kill the greatest number, but also to keep the birds as much as possible 
off their nests, so as to addle the eggs or destroy the young as the case 
might be. The result of this is that very many were destroyed, and a 
sensible reduction in number has taken place. But a certain change in 
tke habits of these birds has been observed. They have during last spring 
attacked the nests of Grouse and other game, and pilfered the eggs for 
food, this being due, it has been supposed, to the annoyance which they 
have endured about their rookeries. This system of destroying them 
therefore requires to be considered, if we do not wish to make the bird a 
more mischievous one than previously. Another point of general interest 
to ornithologists has been brought out here by Mr. Turnbull, B.Se., who 
has examined dead Rooks where a rookery was being “cleared out,” and 
found grubs and wireworms in the birds when dissected shortly after they 
were killed, but grain only in those examined a day or two after being de- 
stroyed, his contention being that digestion went on after death, and that 
this accounted for little but grain being found in those the subject of 
the Highland Agricultural Society’s article. Thus digestion after death 
is worthy of attention, and tends to bring out the views most com- 
monly held on the food of the Rook. Those forwarded to the Highland 
Agricultural Society were driven by rail to Edinburgh from Montrane, and 
time must have elapsed before they were examined.— Wm. Witson (Alford, 
Aberdeen). 


Serrated Claws of the Common Heron.—On reading the description 
of the Common Heron (Ardea cinerea) given by Mr. Howard Saunders in 
his ‘ Manual of British Birds,’ I was rather disappointed to find that he 
does not make mention of the serrated claws of this species, as I had hoped 
to gather some knowledge as to their probable use. On examining a speci- 
men shot here a few weeks ago I find the serration is extremely similar to 
that of the Nightjar, situated upon the claws of the same toes, and pointing 
inwardly. I do not think they could be of the least use to the owner for 
holding or securing food, nor would they retard the bird’s flight from 
branches of trees, &c., as the serration is not on the under part of the claw. 
I am of opinion that the Nightjar has a decided use for its serrated claws, 
and I should be pleased if ornithologists wonld enlighten me by giving their 
observations or opinions as to the use of these claws in the Common Heron. 
—Sran.Ley Lewis (Wells, Somerset). | 

[Serrated claws are described in most of the handbooks where structure 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 39 


is dealt with. Prof. Newton, in his ‘ Dictionary,’ writes :—‘‘ The inner 
side of the nail of the third toe is often serrated like a fine comb, as in 
Cormorants, Herons (including Scopus), [bis, Dromas, Cursorius, Glareola, 
also in many Nightjars.” Dr. Bowdler Sharpe (‘ Handb. Birds Great Britain’) 
has also referred to the combed or pectinated claw of the Heron, like the 

claw of the Barn-Owl or of the Nightjar. This ornithologist (ibid. vol. ii. 
 p. 49) has discussed the use of this serration. He writes :—* Another 
puzzling character found in the Nightjar is the pectinated claw on the © 
middle toe, and it is extremely difficult to imagine the use of this comb- 
like appendage. It has been suggested that it is of use to the bird in 
retaining a firm hold on the bark of the trees, when it sits along a bough. 
Another use for the comb has been suggested in the cleaning of the long 
rictal bristles from the débris of the moths and beetles on which the bird 
feeds. Dr. Giinther, who had some young Nightjars for some time in con- 
finement, tells me that the only use which he found the birds to make of 
this pectinated claw was to scratch the surface of a chair or sofa on which 
they were sitting. Thus it may be a useful appendage in scratching or 
distributing the earth for the purpose of seeking its food.” Seebohm 
(‘ Brit. Birds ’) refers to the same or similar theories.— Eb. | 


Bewick’s Swan in the Moy Estuary. — On Dec. 12th, 1899, a herd of 
twenty Bewick’s Swans (Cygnus bewicki) visited the estuary, and rested for 
some hours on the Bartragh sands, opposite Moyne Abbey. One fine bird 
was secured; it measured 3 ft. 9 in. in length from tip of bill to end of tail- 
feathers, and weighed 14 1bs. All the birds appeared to be adult, for there 
were no grey-plumaged individuals amongst them. — Ropert WakrEN 
(Moyview, Ballina). 

Black-game in Suffolk.—Referring to my note under this heading in 
‘The Zoologist’ (1899, p. 557), I have just received a letter from J. D. 
Cobbold, Esq., Holy Wells, Ipswich, stating that he had lately turned 
down about twenty of these birds (Tetrao tetriz) on the heath to the east of 
Ipswich as an experiment. There is no doubt therefore that the young 
Blackcock shot on the Cliff Farm was one of them, and it is to be hoped 
now that the facts of the case are known that the remainder of these grand 
birds will be left unmolested until they have become thoroughly established 
in the district.—E. A. Butter (Plumton House, Bury St. Edmunds). 

For many years Mr. Mackenzie has turned down large numbers of 
Black-game on his estate near Thetford. They have been known to breed, 
but do not increase. Possibly the bird mentioned by Col. Butler came 
from this estate. It may interest your readers to know that the same 
gentleman has turned Capercaillie on his property near Inverness, and 
that they are doing well—Heatiey Nosiu (Temple Combe. Henley-on- 
Thames). | 


40 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Golden Plover and Lapwings in the Moy Estuary.—The Golden 
Plover (Charadrius pluvialis) did not visit the sands of the estuary in any 
numbers until the middle and towards the end of October, after which time 
they began to increase up to the 24th, when I saw fully two thousand birds 
in one large stand resting on the Scurmore sands: and since then they 
have continued to haunt the banks in probably large numbers, for they now 
have separated into two large flocks, one haunting the Moyne, and the 
other the Scurmore sands. The Lapwings (Vanellus vulgaris) appeared 
about the banks in their average numbers up to Nov. 20th, when they 
visited the sands in immense flocks, more numerous than in any year since 
1878 (the ‘“‘ great Lapwing year”). On the morning of the 20th Mr. A. C. 
Kirkwood, of Bartragh, at daybreak, saw an immense flock at a great 
height coming from a northerly direction over the bay. On reaching the 
island they did not alight, but kept flying about for nearly an hour, when 
they lowered their flight, and pitched on the Bartragh sands opposite 
Moyne Abbey. To give some idea of the immense numbers of the birds 
about, I may mention that at the time they settled down near Moyne, 
equally large flocks were farther up the estuary, on the Scurmore and 
Castleconnor sands, and a fourth large flock was resting on the banks 
outside the island next the bay. Most of the birds were evidently 
strangers, distrusting their new quarters, and so restless and easily alarmed 
that it was impossible to get within shot of any of the large stands. Mr. 
Kirkwood was out all day with his punt and gun, and was unable to come 
within range of any, except a few scattered birds. I was out all day on the 
21st, and was equally unsuccessful. I never met Lapwings so wild, so 
utterly unlike their usual unsuspicious habits on the approach of a punt. 
I was out again on the 22nd, and, although the birds actually swarmed on 
the Moyne, Bartragh, Scurmore, and Castleconnor sands, yet I was unable 
to get near the large flocks, only a few scattered birds allowing my punt 
within range. It is impossible to account for this extreme wildness of the 
Lapwings ; the fine weather could not be the cause, for some of my best 
days’ Plover shooting on the estuary were on mild calm days, when, owing 
to the mildness of the weather, the birds used to assemble on the sands at 
the edge of the channels to wash and bathe, and remain until driven off by 
the rising tide. It will be interesting to know whether a similar large 
influx of the birds has taken place in other parts of the country, and I 
trust that some of your correspondents will mention if such has come under | 
their notice.x—Ropert Warren (Moyview, Ballina). 


PISCES. 


Blue Sharks in Killala Bay, Co. Mayo.—One day towards the end of 
last October, as Capt. Kirkwood, of Bartragh, was walking along the sands 


aren > 


NOTHS AND QUERIES. 41 


at the western end of the island, he found a large Blue Shark (Charcarias 
glaucus) thrown up by the surf at high-water mark. The fish was dead, 
but quite fresh, and was one of the largest I have ever heard of on the Irish 
coast, measuring between nine and ten feet in length. Another specimen 
of this Shark was taken in the estuary about Nov. 22nd by two persons who 
were out wildfowl shooting amongst the islands of the estuary. Hearing a 
splashing in the water some distance astern of their boat they turned, and, 
rowing up to where the noise proceeded from, found the fish aground, 
floundering in the shallow water, unable to swim away. Killing it with a 
couple of shots, they with great difficulty got it on board the boat, as it 
measured about eight feet in length, and was very heavy. — RoBert 
WarREN (Moyview, Ballina). 


42 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


— 


An Account of the Deep-Sea Brachyura, and a Descriptive Cata- 
logue of the Indian Deep-Sea Fishes collected by the Royal 
Indian Marine Survey Ship ‘ Investigator.’ By A. AuLcock, 
M.B., C.M.Z.S., &c. Calcutta: Printed by order of the 
Trustees of the Indian Museum. 


Bot these publications relate to the good work done on 
board the ‘ Investigator,’ a small paddle-steamer of 580 tons, 
which since 1885 has yearly contributed the results of deep-sea 
dredgings to the Indian Museum. 

The Brachyura number fifty-three species belonging to thirty- 
eight genera, and, with two exceptions, have all been obtained 
from depths of over one hundred fathoms. Although the list fur- 
nishes no ‘theory of geographical distribution,” yet Dr. Alcock 
remarks :—‘‘ If, however, we regard genera and not species, the 
list discloses some suggestive affinities between the Brachyuran 
fauna of these seas and of certain parts of the Atlantic area. 
These affinities may, of course, be taken as merely confirmatory 
of current views as to the unity of the deep-sea fauna; but seeing 
that the Brachyura are not generally considered to belong to the 
true deep-sea (abyssal) fauna, I think it equally probable that 
they may afford evidence of a former open connection between 
the seas in question.” The species are very fully described, and 
the memoir is enriched by four good plates. 

The fishes included in the ‘ Catalogue’ were all dredged by 
the ‘ Investigator’ in deep water, and, excluding a few mangled 
remains which cannot be identified, number one hundred and 
sixty-nine species. They were obtained between the meridians 
of 65° and 99° E., and the parallels of 5° and 24° N., while no fewer 
than one hundred and twenty-six species ‘‘have, so far as is 
known, been taken only by the ‘ Investigator.’ ”’ 

The views of Dr, Giinther as to a former direct and open 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. ~* 45 


connection between the Mediterranean and Japanese Seas are 
supported by Dr. Alcock, who considers that the ‘‘ hypothesis 
that appears to offer the most satisfactory explanation is, that a 
very considerable part of the fish fauna of the Oriental region 
originated from, and to a certain extent is a remnant of, the fauna 
of the Tertiary Mediterranean of Prof. Suess—of a Mediterrnean 
that extended from the present Gulf of Mexico, through the 
present Mediterranean basin, far into the astern Hemisphere.” 
Species whose distribution may be used ‘as evidence for this 
hypothesis are not only pointed out among these fishes, but also 
have been detailed by Dr. Alcock among the deep-sea Madre- 
poraria and Brachyura of the same region. If the number of 
Indian genera of marine fishes are estimated at three hundred 
and fifty, and of species at one thousand two hundred; “then 
over fifty-six per cent. of the genera and close on five per cent. 
of the species are also found in the Atlantic-Mediterranean 
region.” The argument is much advanced and clearly elucidated 
by a large chart compiled from Plate 11 of Dr. E. Koken’s ‘Die 
Vorwelt und ihre Entwickelungsgeschichte,’ showing the supposed 
eoast-lines of the Tertiary continents and the then Great Inland 


Sea. 


The Rainbow Trout. By Cuartes Epwarpd WALKER and CHARLES 
S. Parrerson. Lawrence & Bullen, Limited. 


Tue Rainbow Trout (Salmo irideus var. Shasta), whose natural 
home is the Pacific slope rivers, has been largely introduced into 
the waters of various portions of the world. It has succeeded 
wonderfully well in New Zealand, where specimens have been 
taken reaching nine pounds in weight; in this country one of 
the first authentic reports of its colonization was a capture in 
Warwickshire in 1892 from a lake stocked in 1890. But success 
in the introduction of this fish depends upon a proper knowledge 
of its life-history. ‘‘ The natural zone of the Rainbow Trout 
may be roughly said to be from 35° to 45° N.—that is to say, the 
latitude of Spain and the South of France’’; and the best 
developed form of the true S. wideus var. Shasta ‘‘ has for its 
original environment water not liable to freeze, and situated in a 
country the mean temperature of which is not below 55° F., and 


44 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


usually about 57°.” Hence the Rainbow is doomed if placed in 
cold waters, escaping from them if possible, but if not, gradually 
dying off. ‘Probably it will never stand a chance north of 
Yorkshire, even if it should do well in selected waters in that 
county.”’ 

A bad report is given for Herons and Kingfishers who exist 
near rearing ponds. We read:—‘‘I have often seen Herons 
fishing on Trout streams, and have seen Kingfishers catching 
Trout fry. There are only two courses open to the fish-culturist, 
to protect his ponds or kill the birds. I believe it best to pro- 
tect the ponds first, and kill the birds afterwards.”’ 

This is an excellent little monograph of a fish, with directions 
for its acclimatization and breeding. It is thorough and yet 
concise, occupying but sixty-four pages, with a bibliography and 
sufficient illustration. 


Our Rarer British Breeding Birds. By R. Kearton, F.Z.S. 
Cassell & Co., Limited. 


WE now quite expect an annual volume from Mr. Kearton, 
with fresh revelations by the camera, for he knows not only how 
to photograph, but what to photograph. ‘This little volume, we 
are told, is to be regarded as a supplement to a former work on 
‘British Birds” Nests, &c.; and we scarcely require to be 
reminded that the journeying to and fro to photograph the nests, 
eggs, or breeding-places of our rarer birds entails an inroad on 
time and space which is far from being inconsiderable. 

These volumes can be made to advocate a main thesis—the 
photographer rather than the collector, the camera versus the 
gun. By the aid of these illustrations, we live with the birds and 
see the nests in situ. We do not come home with a skin and a 
few blown eggs, but bring back nature in our portfolio. When 
colour photography comes into the possession of science, then 
indeed shall we estimate what is really assimilative colouration 
in nature, and not have to rely on forensic argument based on 
cabinet specimens. By the aid of the camera we shall in the 
future understand the superficial method of organic evolution, 
and when we are able to photograph aquatic life well beneath the 
surface, in colour as well as detail—which is only a matter of 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 45 


time, though probably not in our own personal period—then will 
many brilliant theorists see the hidden things made bare. Mean- 
while, as we turn over these beautiful illustrations, many questions 
arise as to the success in subterfuge, or the apparent absence of 
concealment in the arrangement of eggs and nests. Here we 
may rely on the whole mise en scéne, for as we remember hearing 
Boucicault declaim in the ‘ Octoroon’—alas! too many years 
ago—‘‘ the apparatus never lies.” 

The present volume is equal to its predecessors in illustration, 
but perhaps compares less favourably by absence of narrative, the 
treatment being more descriptive of the birds and nests them- 
selves. The representation of the Dabchick’s nest—covered and 
uncovered—at p. 39 well exhibits the conscious strategy of a bird. 


Die Fledermduse des Berliner Museums fir Naturkunde: 1 Liefe- 
rung, Die Megachiroptera. By Paut Marscuiz. Berlin: 
Georg Reimer. 


NATURALISTs will welcome a new catalogue of the Chiroptera, 
the late Dr. Dobson’s catalogue of the Bats published in 1878, 
naturally now requiring great revision and many additions. 
The inception of the present work appears to be as follows. The 
late Prof. Carl Peters, who presided at the Berlin Museum from 
1857 to 1883, proposed to publish a monograph of the Bats, for 
which no fewer than seventy-five plates were prepared by the 
artists, F. Wagner and G. Miitzel. After the death of Prof. 
Peters these plates remained—without text—in the hands of the 
publisher, and Dr. Matschie has stepped into the breach, and will 
provide from his own pen a descriptive synopsis of the whole 
order, while such additional plates will be given as are necessary 
to bring the work into line with present zoological knowledge. 

Part I. is devoted to the Megachiroptera, or Fruit Bats, and 
the whole work is intended to be completed in four instalments. 

We hope to give a fuller notice on the completion of the work. 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 


Tue Address delivered by the President, Dr. A. Gunther, at the last 
Anniversary Meeting of the Linnean Society of London, refers to and 
describes the “ Fishes from Linne’s private collection, many of which 
have served as types or cotypes for the species enumerated in the ‘ Systema 
Nature,’ and which have never been catalogued.” We learn that the 
collection consists now entirely of dried half-skins of fish either loose or 
mounted on folio sheets of paper; many have been fixed on cardboards, but 
this was done at a comparatively recent period. This method of preserving 
fish, like specimens of a hortus siccus, seems to have been first employed 
by Johann Friederich Gronow,* who described it in the ‘ Philosophical 
Transactions,’ and whose collection of similarly prepared skins is still pre- 
served in the Natural History Museum. 

**We are informed by Sir J. E. Smith himself} that Linne’s private 
collection contained, at the time of its purchase, 158 specimens of dried 
fish-skins, beside some in spirits. These latter were not kept by Smith ; 
perhaps he did not sufficiently care for them to have them sent over from 
Sweden with the other parts of the collection.” Dr. Giinther makes the 
number of specimens at present in the Society’s possession to be rather 
higher, viz. 168, the discrepancy being probably due to the circumstance 
that when two small specimens of the same species were mounted on the 
same sheet of paper they were counted as one by the person who prepared 
the original inventory. At any rate there is no evidence which might lead 
one to suspect that any of the specimens have been lost since they came 
into the possession of the Society. 

The collection was kept for a great many years in one of Linné’s own 
cabinets, which, however well it may have answered its purpose in the pure 
air of Linné’s residence, is quite unsuitable in the dust-laden atmosphere 
of Piccadilly ; and the wonder is, how little the specimens have suffered 
under the accumulation of matter in the wrong place. In order to render 
them more secure in the future, the Council has ordered them to be trans- 
ferred to dust-proof glass-topped boxes, in which they are so arranged that, 


* « A Method of preparing Specimens of Fish by drying their Skins as 
practised by John Frederick Gronovius, M.D., at Leyden” (‘ Philos. Trans.’ 
vol. xlii. 1744, p. 57). 

+ ‘Mem. and Corresp. of the late Sir J. HE. Smith,’ vol. i. p. 114. 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. | 47 


with the aid of an exhaustive catalogue appended to the Address, every — 
specimen can be found without difficulty. 

«In looking over the specimens one is at once struck by the fact that 
the sources whence Linné obtained his fishes were but few in number, and 
therefore that his private collection represents only a fraction of the 
materials upon which his work on the fishes in the ‘Systema Nature’ is 
based. His own specimens belonged to three faunze only, and form, in 
“fact, three distinct sets, viz. ;— 

“1, Scandinavian species. 

«2. A series of German, chiefly fresh-water, fishes. 

“8. The fishes collected for him by Dr. Alexander Garden in South 
Carolina.” 


—_—— 


Tue Fishes of the Firth of Forth and its Tributaries were till quite 
recently detailed alone in Dr. Parnell’s List, published in 1838. In this 
month’s ‘ Annals of Scottish Natural History,’ Mr. Wm. Eagle Clarke has 
added the species found and recorded since that time. Parnell’s List 
included 112 species—as we now know them—and Mr. Eagle Clarke’s 
contribution adds twenty-eight, making a grand total of 140 species to date. 


ee 


At a meeting of the Zoological Society on Dec. 19th last, on behalf of 
Mr. G. S. Mackenzie, F'.Z.S., a photograph was: exhibited of two remark- 
ably large tusks of the African Elephant. They each measured, on the 
outside curve, 10 ft. 4 in. in length, and weighed respectively 235 lbs. and 
225 lbs. These have since been illustrated in the ‘ Field’ of Jan. 6th last. 


We are glad to see that the number of our local Natural History 
Societies has been increased by the formation of the ‘“‘ Hampstead Astron- 
omical and Scientific Society,” for the encouragement of a popular interest 
in the practical study of astronomy, geology, microscopical research, 
zoology, and other branches of science. During the summer months field 
meetings will be organised. The Hon. Secretary is Mr. Basil W. Martin, 
7, Holly Place, Hampstead, N.W. 


A WELL-KNOWN traveller and naturalist has passed away in the person 
of Mr. E. L. Layard, who died on New Year’s Day at his residence at 
Otterbourne, Budleigh Salterton, Devon. He was a sojourner in many 
lands, and interested himself in the natural history of all he visited. He 
will be best remembered in South Africa, where he founded the South 
African Museum at Cape Town, and collected the material for his wel 
known work on the ‘ Birds of South Africa,’ of which there is now an 


48 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


enlarged ‘‘ Sharpe’s”” edition. Ceylon, New Zealand, Para on the Amazon, 
Fiji, and New Caledonia were the scenes of other governmental appoint- 
ments, which covered a term of forty-seven years. He was an old and 
valued contributor to our contemporary the ‘ Field.’ 


In ‘ Nature’ for Dec. 28th last is a most useful article on “ Formalin 
as a preservative ” under the easily recognised initials ““R. L.” We read 
that “ for sterilising freshly killed specimens of mammals and birds, as well 
as egus, that have to be sent some distance to a museum in the flesh, there 
cau be no doubt that formalin is invaluable. And it is no less valuable to 
the field collector of mammals, net only on account of the small bulk a 
sufficiency of the fiuid occupies, but also from the marvellous preservative 
power of the fluid itself. According to Mr. O. Thomas (who reports very 
favourably of it for this purpose), commercial formalin, which is.itself 40 per 
cent. under proof, must be diluted with no less than twenty-five times its 
own bulk of water before use. Moreover, whereas when mammals are pre- 
served in spirit it is necessary to allow a very large amount of fluid to each 
specimen, when formalin is employed the vessel may be crammed as full as 
possibles with specimens, which are preserved without exhibiting the 
slightest traces of putrefaction. When received at the British Museum all 
such specimens are, however, immediately transferred to alcohol, on account 
of their unsuitability for handling when in the original medium.” 


A tarce egg of AYpyornis maximus was sold at auction by Messrs. 
Stevens on November 7th for forty-two guineas. The purchaser was 
Mr. T. G. Middlebrook, of Great Auk-egg notoriety. 


eee 


Tue late Sir James Paget, who died in London on Dee. 30th last at the 
age of eighty-five, beyond his renown as a surgeon, must be remembered as 
a naturalist. In 1834, with the assistance of his brother Charles, he pub- 
lished ‘A Sketch of the Natural History of Yarmouth and its Neighbour- 
hood, containing Catalogues of the Species of Mammals, Birds, Reptiles, 
Fishes, Insects, and Plants at present known.’ Our readers will call to 
mind frequent reference to the same in recent communications in these 
pages by Mr. A. Patterson. 


News has reached this country of the death of America’s great ornith- 
ologist, Dr. Elliott Coues, which took place at Baltimore, U.S.A., on 
Christmas Day. We hope to publish an obituary notice very shortly. 


Zoologist, 1900. Plate I. 


he eam ok a A Ra a» 


Fre? 


Fic. 3.—Newly born (about life-size), 
and nipple. 


Fic. 2.—Feetus. 


MACROPUS GIGANTEUS. 


PoE ZAZOOLOGIST 


No. 704.—February, 1900. 


“HOW DOES THE NEW-BORN KANGAROO GET 
INTO THE MOTHERS POUCH?” 


By D. te Sover, C.M.Z.S., &c.; Asst. Dir. Zoological 
Gardens, Melbourne. 


Puate I. 


Havine seen an article under the above heading in a recent 
number of ‘The Zoologist’ (1899, p. 368), in which it was 
stated that there is evidently much confusion on this interesting 
question, I thought it would be a help to state what has been 
observed in a wild specimen of the Grey Kangaroo (Macropus 
giganteus). When the young one is ready to be born, the mother 
sits down on the ground, resting on the upper portion of the base 
of her tail, and with that appendage resting level on the ground 
in front of her (Plate I., fig, 1, upper figure) ; she then holds her 
pouch open with her two fore-paws, ana, as the helpless mite is 
born, it rests on the soft fur of the under side of the tail. The 
mother immediately transfers it to her pouch with her lips only, 
and evidently with great care attaches it to the nipple. The mouth 
of the young one is apparently only a round hole, and it as yet 
has no power of suction; but the nipple is of a peculiar shape, 
with the point hard, and the mother is thereby enabled to insert 
it into the mouth of the young one. She then holds it in position 
while she forces the milk into the nipple, which thereby swells 
out and holds the young one on; but if, after being once firmly 

Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., February, 1900. E 


50 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


attached, it is pulled off, it cannot be replaced, even by the 
mother, for the end of the nipple now being flaccid instead of 
hard cannot well be inserted into the mouth of the little one. 

The illustrations show the foetus about two days before birth 
(Plate I. fig. 2); also the young one about life-size, just as it had 
been born, but not transfixed to the nipple (Plate I. fig. 3); and 
the nipple with the hardened point just ready for the young one 
(Plate I. fig. 3). It will be noticed how immature the little one 
is, and also that its fore legs are much larger than its hind ones. 
I have the specimens here shown in spirits. It has not yet 
been proved, as far as I am aware of, how long after birth the 
young one is able to draw nourishment for itself—probably three 
months. 


( 51 ) 


LAND BIRDS AT SEA. 
By Sureron K. Hurustrone Jones, M.B., R.N., F.L.S. 


No one who has at certain seasons of the year made anything 
that can be called a voyage at sea can have failed to observe the 
remarkable fact that often, when far away from land, birds other 
than sea birds come on board the ship. These birds are almost 
all of them migrants, and it is mainly during the spring and 
autumn months that they are observed to frequent the hospitable 
refuge that a ship at sea offers them. 

Most of these birds are, I believe, such as have by some 
accident, often doubtless stress of weather, lost their way and 
their companions in migration at the same time, and, wandering 
over the waste of water, gladly take advantage of any passing ship 
for the purpose of resting. Some few may perhaps have been 
blown out to sea by gales of wind, or even chased from the land 
by birds of prey. Often the wanderers have evidently lost their 
bearings, for they hang about the ship much longer than is 
actually necessary for the purpose of resting, and indeed gener- 
ally, I think, until nearing the land. 

In my own limited experience the birds have come on board 
either singly or in twos and threes. In the following notes are 
jotted down the occurrence on various occasions and in different 
localities of a few such birds. ‘They are not very many, and, I 
fear, they are not very important. They were made partly whilst 
I was surgeon to the steamship ‘ Anselm,’ of Liverpool, in 1897, 
and partly during my service in H.M.S. ‘ Repulse,’ of the 
Channel Squadron. In the ‘Anselm’ I sailed from Liverpool 
to Hamburg, and thence to Havre, Lisbon, Madeira, and Brazil. 
In the Channel Squadron most of my time at sea has been spent 
cruising off the coasts of Spain and Portugal, though I have also 
been to Sardinia in the Mediterranean, besides much cruising in 
British waters. The first notes I have, however, of land birds at 
sea are curiously not of their actual occurrence on board the ship. 

E 2 


52 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Cypselus apus.—On May 9th, whilst steaming up the English 
Channel in very fine weather, at about forty miles from south 
coast of England, I noticed several parties of Swifts. These birds 
were evidently migrating, for they flew straight ahead, and were 
obviously making a “ bee-line” for the English coast. They 
were not, however, flying at any great height. 

Hirundo rustica.—I noticed one Swallow also flying in the 
Same way, and in the same direction. 

On May 10th, whilst traversing the North Sea between Dover 
and the mouth of the Elbe, with coast of Holland just in sight, a 
Pipit (Anthus sp.) came on board. 

Corvus cornix.—At dusk on the same day, when about midway 
between Heligoland and the German coast, a Hooded Crow 
alighted in the rigging of the foremast. After dark the third 
officer climbed up and caught this bird, which I should have 
otherwise not have been able to identify. 

Saxicola enanthe.-—On May 17th, when about half-way be- 
tween the mouth of the Elbe and Dover on the return journey, a 
Wheatear came on board of us, evidently very much tired. 

Turtur communis and Anthus pratensis.—On May 21st, at the 
entrance to the Bay of Biscay, but a long way from Ushant, a 
Turtle-Dove, a Meadow-Pipit, and a Swallow came on board the 
ship, and remained all day. On May 22nd, being now about 
two-thirds of the way across the Bay, a second Turtle-Dove and 
a second Swallow joined those mentioned above, and later a Sand 
Martin (Cotile riparia) also put in an appearance. They all 
remained by the ship, and at dusk the hands going aloft drove 
the Turtle-Doves from their roosting-place on the fore main 
topsail-yard, and one of them, passing over the funnel, became 
suffocated, and was engulfed in it. On May 23rd, when we 
neared the Portuguese coast, all the birds left us. 

The above are the few notes I was able to make of land birds 
coming on board the ship whilst I was in the steamship ‘ Anselm.’ 

Whilst serving in H.M.S. ‘ Repulse,’ I have, I fear, not made 
very many notes, and for this there are several reasons. In the 
first place, this ship is one of a fleet, and when there are fourteen 
ships together, as is generally the case, there are obviously 
thirteen chances to one against a bird alighting on board of us. 
In the second place, this is a very large ship—one of the biggest 


LAND BIRDS AT SEA. 53 


battle-ships afloat—and consequently it is very much easier to 
miss a bird which alights on board so large a vessel than it is to 
do so in a smaller craft like the ‘ Anselm.’ 

Upupa epops.—On March 15th, 1899, when about one hundred 
miles west of Cape Finisterre, at five o’clock in the evening, a 
Hoopoe came on board of us, but shortly dropped astern and dis- 
appeared. This happened in very fine weather. 

Falco tinnunculus.—On March 23rd, 1899, when about sixty 
miles from the north-west coast of Spain, in dull cloudy weather, 
a Kestrel flew on board, and remained the rest of the day. At 
night it managed to get into one of the canvas steaming covers 
round the fore-topmast, where a boy made an ineffectual attempt 
to catch it. 

Daulias luscinia.— On April 29th, being then about one 
hundred and sixty miles W.S.W. of the southern end of Sardinia, 
two Turtle-Doves, a Nightingale, and another small bird which I 
could not get a good view of, came on board the ship; but all 
shortly left us for some other member of the squadron. 

Sturnus vulgaris.— On Oct. 26th, 1899, whilst proceeding 
towards Ushant from Scilly, and about one-third nearer the 
former, at 5 p.m. in foggy weather, a Starling alighted on board of 
us for a few minutes, and then departed in an eastwardly direction. 
On Oct. 27th, when about midway across the Bay of Biscay, a 
Swallow came and perched on our quarter-deck awning ridge 
rope at 9 a.m. 

The above are my notes, lamentably scanty, but still a con- 
tribution to what is, I think, an interesting subject. I offer them 
without comment. 


54 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


SOME REMARKS ON THE BIRDS SEEN IN THE 
SOUTH-EAST PART OF THE MAINLAND OF 
ORKNEY IN OCTOBER, 1899. 


By N. F. Ticenurst, M.A., F.Z.S., &c. 


Havine last year to take my holiday somewhat later than 
usual, I took advantage of a pressing invitation to spend a fort- 
night with some friends in the parish of St. Mary’s Holm, in the 
south-east part of the mainland of Orkney, for purposes of sport 
and natural history. As this part of the British Isles was to 
me quite new ground, and being somewhat out of the way, an 
account of the birds met with there may perhaps be of interest 
to those readers of ‘The Zoologist’ who are also unacquainted 
with that part of the world. Of course the first fortnight in 
October is not altogether a favourable time for observing bird- 
life, the weather being anything but settled; and, again, the 
autumn migrants have hardly begun to arrive, while the summer 
birds have for the most part left. Three facts, I think, strike 
one who comes here for the first time from the south, viz. the very 
few passerine birds seen ; the number of species, and the quantity, 
of Waders, Gulls, and Wildfowl; and the tameness of almost all 
the birds. The last fact, I think, is accounted for by the careful 
preservation by the large landowners, under the Wild Birds Pro- 
tection Acts, and the comparatively small number of people 
who shoot. In fact, the Gulls, &c., have increased so much of 
late years that the people are beginning to complain. 

The ground for the most part is low and undulating, the 
higher parts being all moorland, the low ground being either grass 
or under cultivation; the crops grown being principally oats, 
potatoes, and roots. The coast is mostly low and rocky, rising 
to twenty or forty feet in places, with here and there a sandy or 
gravelly bay where a small burn enters the sea. At the south- 
eastern extremity is the rather higher point of Roseness, the 
cliffs of the east coast gradually rising in height from here, till 


BIRDS SHEN IN THE MAINLAND OF ORKNEY. 55 


they reach their highest point in the fine cliffs of Galtic. The 
east coast is practically open to the North Sea, the only island 
beyond it being Coppinshay, which is several miles away. 

To the south are the two small islands of Lambholm and Glims- 
holm,—the former only of which is inhabited,—separated from 
the mainland by a sound of about a mile in width, through which 
the tide ebbs and flows at a rate of six or seven knots. Beyond 
these two is a rather larger and higher island, which almost shuts 
the great island of South Ronaldshay from view. Ona fine clear 
day the Pentland Skerries can be seen away to the south-east, and 
to the south-west some of the fine tops of the Caithness mountains 
are visible. On the north and north-west the near view is shut in 
by the rolling moorland of the mainland itself, the tops of the 
Harray hills and Orphir in the west mainland only being seen ; 
while to the west the fine tops of Hoy are visible in the distance, 
when they are not wreathed in cloud and mist, which seems to be 
their usual condition at this time of the year. 


BuacksirD (T'urdus merula).—Several young birds were seen 
about the garden at Gremeshall, probably the members of a 
brood reared there, as none were seen elsewhere. 

Repwine (Turdus iliacus).—A single bird was seen feeding 
among the rocks along the shore on Oct. 16th, and several others 
were noticed later on the same day on the moorland; they seemed 
to have just arrived, and to have come with the Jack-Snipes. 
Wind 8.E.; north-west gales the two previous days. 

FrevprareE (Turdus pilaris).—One single bird was seen flying 
over on Oct. 14th, but the main flocks had not arrived by the 18th. 
They are said to come with the Woodcocks. 

Prep Waerait (Motacilla lugubris)—A pair of these birds 
had taken up their abode about the farm-buildings at Groemes- 
hall, and were always to be seen there or along the loch-side; no 
others were observed. 

Meanow-Pierr (Anthus pratensis). — Fairly common in the 
oat-stubbles, and small flocks of eight or ten were seen several 
times on the moors. 

Rock Piprr (Anthus obscurus). — These birds appeared to be 
more numerous than the preceding; they were always to be seen 
along the shore, coming right up to the houses, but not pene- 
trating far inland, 


56 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Hovust-Sparrow (Passer domesticus). — Common about the 
houses and in the oat-stubbles near the farms; not going far 
from human habitations, and nowhere in large flocks. 

T wire (Linota flavirostris).—Small flocks of five to twelve were 
seen every dav feeding on the stubbles, while occasionally a few 
were observed on the heather. I am not sufficiently acquainted 
with the note of this bird to distinguish it from that of the Lin- 
net, but the slimness and greater comparative length of tail 
were conspicrous points of difference, while, with the glasses, 
the yellow beak could be made out. They were always very 
restless, and not nearly so tame as most of the other birds. 

Snow Buntina (Plectrophenax nivalis).—A single bird of this 
species was seen on the moors on Oct. 10th ; the main flocks had 
not arrived by the 18th. 

Sxy-Larx (Alauda arvensis).—Not very numerous; afew were 
generally to be seen in the grassy meadows, and around the edges 
of the loch; they seemed to prefer places that were somewhat 
wet and boggy to the drier parts of the meadows. <A few were 
also seen on the ‘‘ brakes” (pieces of enclosed moorland not yet 
cultivated), but none were noticed on the moorland itself. 

STARLING (Sturnus vulgaris) —Every evening a vast flock of 
some thousands assembled at sunset on the few small trees in 
the garden at Greemeshall, quite blackening the almost bare 
branches. At the same time the ridges of the roofs and ‘ crow- 
steps’ of the gables would be similarly occupied, while a ring of 
birds were seated round the edge of every chimney-pot. A little 
later on, and apparently by signal, they would all rise in a great 
cloud, and go off to roost on the reeds in the loch. During the 
day there were comparatively few to be seen; one or two small 
flocks were always feeding round the loch edge, and a few were 
constantly about the farm-buildings, but where the vast numbers 
that assembled at evening came from was a mystery. The tame- 
ness of those about the house was absurd; when disturbed from 
the chicken-run they would fly on to the wall, and sit chattering 
within six or eight feet of one. The majority of the birds © 
were immature, in a plumage that I had not noticed before, the 
head and neck being a dull russet-brown, while the rest of the 
body was in the speckled glossy plumage. 

JACKDAW (Corvus monecula).—A large colony inhabited the 


BIRDS SHEN IN THE MAINLAND OF ORKNEY. 57 


cliffs of Galtic at the east end of the island, feeding in the 
adjacent fields during the day, and returning to roost on the cliffs 
at sundown. 

Rook (Corvus frugilegus).—A few single birds were seen feed- 
ing in the meadows, and a few with the Jackdaws at Galtic. I 
was told that they breed here in the sea-cliffs, which seems 
probable, as there are practicaily no trees of any size in the 
island. 

Hooprp Crow (Corvus cornix).— A few pairs were seen about 
the shore and loch from time to time, but they were by no means 
numerous, and at the most I never saw more than three pairs in 
a day. 

PEREGRINE (Faico peregrinus).—One bird was seen to leave 
the cliffs at Galtic on Oct. 6th; it was raining and misty at the 
time, and we lost sight of it out at sea. I could not find out 
definitely whether these birds bred in those particular cliffs or not, 
but was shown a very beautiful and deeply marked clutch taken 
on Hoy in 1897. 

Meruin (Falco esalon).—A Merlin was seen pursuing a flock 
of Starlings over the Gremeshall loch on Oct. 4th, but, so long 
as we were able to watch it, was not successful in striking 
one; when it stooped they immediately bunched together, and 
twisted to one side. On Oct. 14th, when after Golden Plover, a 
Merlin appeared, and successfully struck down one of them, not 
thirty yards from where we were standing. On putting it up, 
it carried its prey off to a neighbouring stubble, and began to 
devour it there, the Plover weighing it down so much on its 
way that it was unable to rise more than a yard from the ground. 
One or two other birds were seen. 

Kestret (Falco tinnunculus).— Only four birds were seen 
altogether, two of which were adult males. 

Common Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo).— Quite a rare 
bird; one was put up from the shore on Oct. 14th, and one flew 
over the boat on Oct. 12th while we were fishing in the bay at 
St. Mary’s Holm. 

SHAG (Phalacrocorax graculus). — Very numerous, adult and 
immature birds being in almost equal numbers. Every morning, 
about 7.30, large numbers were fishing in the sound, forming in 
the distance a thick black line on the water. By 8.80 the 


58 THE ZO0OLOGIST. 


majority had left the water, and were digesting their meal and 
preening their feathers on the rocky point at the east end of the 
opposite island of Lambholm, which for the rest of the day would 
be black with them. Some were always to be seen close in shore, 
diving and fishing in quite shallow water, and allowing a near 
approach. On the cliffs at Galtic large numbers were sitting 
on the whitewashed ledges, from which the nests had already 
been blown away. On approaching in a boat we came close to 
them before they threw themselves from the ledges, and, flying 
close over our heads, flopped into the water within a few yards of 
us, there to dive away out of reach of the boat. On Oct. 14th 
the sound was black with Shags, all busy fishing over an area of 
several acres; they were coming and going all the morning from > 
this particular area, and probably there was an unusually large 
shoal of Sillocks (yearling Coalfish) there; several thousand 
Shags must have been fishing at once. The natives are com- 
plaining that the supply of fish is falling off since the Wild Birds 
Protection Act came into force. 

Common Herron (Ardea cinerea).—One or two were seen every 
day in the rocky pools along the shore at low tide. 

Brent Goose (Bernicla brenta).— Three Brent Geese were 
put up from a sheltered cove on Oct. 13th, while a north-west 
gale, which had lasted all the 12th, was still at its height. No 
Geese had been seen passing over this year up to Oct. 18th. 

Witp Duck (Anas boscas).—A few pairs inhabited the loch at 
Groemeshall, spending most of their time in the thick reeds, and 
flying out to sea when disturbed. On Oct. 13th, during the gale, 
a pair was seen in a Sheltered pool on the shore. 

Wicron (Mareca penelope).—Not identified with certainty, 
but a pair of birds put up at dusk from a milldam on Oct. 16th 
were nearly certainly of this species. 

PocuarpD (Luligula ferina). — Several small flocks were often 
seen off the reeds in the Greemeshall loch. 

Turrep Duck (Fuligula cristata).—One Tufted drake was 
identified with certainty on the Greemeshall loch on Oct. 9th, and 
eight other birds with it were almost certainly immature birds 
of the same species. 

Scaup (Fuligula marila). — A pair of Scaup were on the loch 
at St. Mary’s Holm the whole time I was there ; they were very 


BIRDS SHEEN IN THE MAINLAND OF ORKNEY. 59 


tame, and I frequently watched them through the glasses sleeping 
on the water not twenty yards away. The drake had not yet 
attained full plumage, being still brown on the back, and with 
the white forehead, though its head and neck were nearly black. 

Hiper (Somateria mollissima).— The Eider was by far the 
commonest Duck. Single pairs and small flocks of eight to 
fifteen could be seen at any time among the rocks busily feeding, 
and they were often noticed fighting and chasing one another, when 
some choice morsel was secured by one of them. So tame were 
they that when one went out on to the rocks close to them they 
only swam off a few yards into deeper water. All the drakes but 
one seen were fully adult birds in winter plumage, the exception 
being in partial eclipse, though evidently fast getting his full 
winter dress. 

Common Scorer (Gidemia nigra).— One pair only was seen 
off St. Mary’s Holm on Oct. 4th. 

VELVET ScoTter (Gidemia fusca).—Not seen on the mainland, 
but five birds of this species rose in front of the steamer on 
Oct. 18th, off Hoxa, in South Ronaldshay. 

RED-BREASTED MERGANSER (Mergus serrator).— Two birds of 
this species were seen in the sound off Groemeshall on Oct. 6th, 
three more farther east on Oct. 13th, and four more in the bay at 
St. Mary’s Holm on Oct. 17th, near which place there was a nest 
this year. All were in the immature plumage, and, though I went 
quite close to them on the 13th and 17th, I could see no signs of 
any dark feathers coming on the necks of any. 

Rocx- Dove (Columba livia).—The Rock-Doves breed in con- 
siderable numbers in the caves at the east end of the mainland, and, 
though they are said to be less numerous than they were twenty 
years ago, there does not appear to be much danger of their exter- 
mination, the coast being very exposed, and quite unapproachable 
except in a flat calm, and even then they are by no means easy to 
shoot. The majority seemed to be pure bred birds, but it is 
evident that the tame birds interbreed with them in the caves, 
and the wild birds are said to visit the dovecots in the winter. 
One bird seen was nearly white, while another had many brown 
feathers in the wings and scapulars; and two others had white 
heads. At this time of the year they feed almost entirely on the 
stubbles, returning to the cliffs as soon as their crops are full, 


60 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Rep Grousr (Lagopus scoticus).—There are a very fair num- 
ber of Grouse in the east mainland, and owing to efficient pro- 
tection they are on the increase. Bags of fifteen to twenty-five 
brace are made over dogs in the early part of the season. Later 
on they become wilder, and after rough weather such as prevailed 
during the second week in October they pack, and are then prac- 
tically unapproachable; the old cocks, which generally remain 
solitary, are very difficult to get near at any time, running in 
front of the dogs for hundreds of yards. At this time of the 
year, when the crops are being got in, the birds are mostly to 
be found on the fringe of the moor, not more than a hundred 
yards from the cultivated land, on to which they move at night 
to feed. 

Moor-HEN (Gallinula chloropus).—Only one was seen, viz. on 
the Gremeshall loch on Oct. 3rd. 

Coot (Fulica atra).—A flock of twenty to twenty-five Coots 
live on the loch at Gremeshall, nesting in the reeds, and appa- 
rently staying there all the year round. One pair was seen on 
the loch at St. Mary’s Holm. 

GoLDEN P.iover (Charadrius pluvialis). — Several Aisaied of 
from twenty to more than a hundred and fifty individuals were 
always to be found at particular places. At high water they were 
generally to be seen in the “ parks’’ (meadows enclosed by stone 
walls), for certain of which they had a special predilection. At 
low water two or three special places on the ebb were sure finds 
for them, where they were almost invisible when standing still, 
so well did their golden plumage harmonise with the yellow sea- 
weed and rocks. Several times I have crawled up to a particular 
piece of ebb, and carefully examined every part of it with glasses, 
without seeing anything, till presently a bird would stretch up a 
wing, and then suddenly some fifty or sixty birds would become 
visible. In calm weather they were remarkably tame, allowing 
a near approach in the open, if one did not walk directly at them ; 
but in a gale of wind they were much wilder and very uneasy, 
continually flying up and settling again at some other spot for 
apparently no reason at ali. At night the flocks appeared to 
split up, the birds going off in twos and threes to the * parks.” 
Round the margin of the loch they associated with the Green 
Plover, and to a smaller degree with the Gulls. 


BIRDS SEEN IN THE MAINLAND OF ORKNEY. 61 


Lapwine (Vanellus vulgaris).—Very common; they are never 
shot at, and are consequently very tame. 

Ringep Piover (Aigialitis hiaticula).—These delightful little 
birds were extremely numerous, and very tame. They were 
always to be seen feeding along the ebb in lots of a few in- 
dividuals up to quite large flocks, very often associating with the 
Turnstones and Golden Plover. Had the weather been more 
propitious some very good photographs might have been obtained, 
as they never thought of flying away till one approached to within 
about four or five yards of them. 

Turnstone (Strepsilas interpres).—Also very common, and 
almost as tame as the preceding. In the first week of October 
only ones and twos were seen, generally with a few Ringed 
Plover; but as the month drew on they increased in numbers, 
and flocks of twenty or more individuals were quite common. 
They seem to be very active little birds, and there is no prettier 
sight than to have four or five of them within a few yards of you, 
busily turning over the seaweed, and literally throwing the 
pebbles about in their search for food. Several birds were seen 
with a few chestnut feathers on the shoulders, but most of them 
seemed to be immature. | 

OysTERCATCHER (Hematopus ostralegus).—Common, in single 
pairs and small flocks, associating only with the Curlew, and 
almost as wild and wary as they ; whereas all the smaller shore 
birds were to be found close in shore, the Oystercatchers always 
kept well out on the rocks, where the sea was breaking, the spray 
often flying right over them. I noticed that they always stood 
head to wind. 

Common Snire (Gallinago ccelestis).—Very common on the 
moors, and, up till Oct. 10th, round the loch also, where large 
bags are sometimes made. After that date there were continuous 
gales from the north-west, with rain, and the birds all left the 
loch-side, probably passing on south, the numbers on the moors 
perhaps decreasing slightly about the same time; but this is 
difficult to say. 

JACK-SNIPE (Gallinago gallinula).—A solitary specimen was 
seen by the Groeemeshall loch on Oct. 9th, and two others on the 
moors on Oct. 16th. It is probable that on this latter date there 
had been a small migration of these birds, for the dog picked up 


62 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


one which was too exhausted to fly; the Redwings also were 
first noticed on that day. The wind had been blowing a gale 
from the north-west for the two previous days, and had shifted 

that morning to the south-west. 

Repsuank (Totanus calidris).—I have never before, except in 
the breeding season, seen Redshanks so tame as they were here. 
My previous experience of the Redshank as a shore bird had 
been that he was one of the wariest, not only keeping well out of 
harm’s way himself, but letting every other bird know when there 
was any danger near. ‘True, here they did fly off shrieking, and 
making a great noise if you came on them suddenly round a 
corner or over arock; butif you approached quietly, or sat down | 
and kept still, they took hardly any more notice of you than the 
Ring Plover. They went about almost entirely in single pairs, 
and kept pretty much to themselves. 

CurLEW (Numenius arquata).— 1 suppose it is partly its 
innate wariness, and partly the fact that it is the only shore bird, 
besides the Golden Plover, that anyone up here thinks of shoot- 
ing, that causes the Curlew to be just as wild as anywhere 
else. J never saw more than about fifteen together, and they 
were always well out on the edge of the tide, with a sentinel 
posted on the highest piece of rock. Once or twice a small flock 
was seen on the meadow-land, but always well out of shot of the 
nearest stone wall or other cover. Itis only by lying up in their 
line of flight and trusting to luck that a shot can be got at all. 

Guus (Larine).—The great feature of the bird-life of this part 
of the British Isles is of course found in the Gulls; they are present 
everywhere, along the shore, by the loch-side, in the “ parks,” on 
the stubbles, on the dust-heaps, the house-roofs, and even on the 
chimney-pots ; in fact, except perhaps in the middle of the moor, 
you cannot get away from them. ‘The flocks were always mixed, © 
consisting for the most part of Common and Herring Gulls, with 
a fair sprinkling of Kittiwakes and Black-headed Gulls, and 
either one or two pairs of Lesser Black-backs. Of the latter I 
never saw more than two or three pairs along the shore, and of 
Great Black-backs, I do not think there is more than one pair in 
this particular part of the coast. The Gulls were always abso- 
lutely fearless, and you could walk up to within a few yards of 
them before they rose. Two, an immature Lesser Black-back 


BIRDS SEEN IN THE MAINLAND OF ORKNEY. 63 


and an adult Black-headed, had taken possession of a particular 
dust-bin, and they were to be seen there all day and every day, 
standing on an adjacent wall, or sitting asleep in the field a few 
yards off. Every morning, directly it was light, some twenty 
Black-headed Gulls came on to the lawn in front of the house, 
and were very busy for an hour and a half picking up worms; I 
never saw any other species there. In the evening large flocks 
used to assemble on the loch from the fields, and, after staying 
there a few minutes, fly off to sea for the night. 

It was a very pretty sight watching the Kittiwakes fishing ; 
on some days the sound was full of them. They reminded me 
very much of the Terns in their methods. A strong north-west 
wind was blowing, and the Kittiwakes would be swooping and 
wheeling about ; when now and then one would mount to about 
twenty feet, and turn head to wind; then, after remaining 
stationary on outspread wings for a second, would drop like a 
stone on to its prey, sending the water up all round it, and com- 
pletely disappearing for a couple of seconds in the spray; then, 
after about half a minute, it would rise again, and resume its 
wheeling flight. 

On Oct. 5th I saw a Little Gull on a rock by the shore, and 
on the next day two more pairs. On the 8th I saw ten together, 
at the same place as I saw the one on the Sth. They were- 
evidently on migration, as I did not see them again, and they 
were not so tame as the other Gulls. They were all in the adult 
winter plumage. 

RicHaRpDson’s Sxua (Stercorarius crepidatus).—I twice watched 
a pair of Arctic Skuas harrying the Kittiwakes, in the sound be- 
tween Lambholm and the mainland. When hunting they always 
seem to work in pairs, one bird dashing at the Gull while the 
other hovers near to pick up the fish as soon as it is dropped. 
Both pairs belonged to the dark form. A single bird I saw on 
the 13th, close in shore, was very dark, with a somewhat lighter 
patch on each wing; in the dull light it looked quite black. 

Common Guittemor (Uria troile).—It is curious that I never 
once saw the Common Guillemot off the south-east mainland, 
whereas a few miles farther west in Scapa flow, and from there 
south to South Ronaldshay, they were very common. 

Buack Guiuturmort (Uria grylle).—Very numerous in the sound 


64 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


between Lambholm and the mainland, where they could always 
be seen, if it was calm enough, floating with the tide east or west, 
according to whether it was ebbing or flowing. A good many 
were also seen off the east coast. They were all in the speckled 
black and white plumage, no wholly black ones being seen. The 
stomachs of the two examined contained the remains of small 
crabs. 

SLAVONIAN GREBE? (Podicipes auritus)—Two Grebes were 
seen on the loch at St. Mary’s Holm on Oct. 15th; they were too 
large for Dabchicks, and so were probably of this species. They 
did not come near enough the shore to enable me to see the shape 
of the bill. 

LirTLe GREBE (Podicipes fluviatilis). — There were two pairs 
of these birds on the loch at St. Mary’s Holm. 


( 65 ) 


NOTES ON THE SEAL AND WHALE FISHERY, 1899. 


By Tuomas SoutrHweELu, F.Z.S. 


THE event of the year at St. John’s is the starting of the 
sealing fleet, which this year (1899) took place under very 
favourable circumstances, the weather being fine and the harbour 
free from ice. As the clock struck eight on the morning of the 
10th of March, those present witnessed the departure of twelve 
fine vessels, all making for the offing, their crews full of hope as 
to the result of the unknown future. The painful memory of the 
disasters which threw so deep a gloom over the voyage of the 
previous season could not fail to be present in the minds of the 
Spectators, whose cheers, added to the salutes from the steam- 
whistles of the vessels, made the hills re-echo as the fleet 
steamed out to brave the hardships and dangers of the ice-fields. 
Happily no such disaster has to be recorded as resulting from 
the voyage thus so auspiciously commenced. 

Of the eighteen steamers present at the Newfoundland fishery 
fourteen made for the ice off the east coast, and four left channel 
for the Gulf fishery; the latter, as wiil be seen, meeting with 
only partial success. All those which fished off the east coast did 
well, and the young Harps (few old Seals were killed) were in 
exceptionally fine condition; at the whelping time severe frosts 
prevailed, and experience shows that in such weather the young 
Seals thrive and rapidly become fat. 

The first to strike the ‘‘ Whitecoats’’ was the ‘ Neptune,’ 
which met with a small and isolated patch near the Funk 
Islands, on the 11th of March; later on they were found in great 
numbers, and by the 29th of the same month three of the vessels 
were back again at St. John’s with full cargoes—a most expe- 
ditious voyage, notwithstanding some delays arising from bad 
weather. 

As the most successful vessel of the fleet, it will be sufficient 


4ool. 4th ser. vol. IV., February, 1900. F 


66 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


to give a brief outline of the voyage oi tne ‘Neptune,’ Capt. 8. 
Blandford, which is typical of all the rest. As already men- 
tioned, on the 11th of March, some twenty-five miles N.E. of the 
Funk Islands, the ‘ Neptune’ met with the first young Seals, but, 
judging that the main body of the breeding pack was to be 
found farther to the northward, Capt. Blandford, steamed thirty 
or forty miles in that direction in search of them, but on the 
18th bad weather came on, and the vessel barely escaped being 
driven ashore on the Funks. From the 14th to the 18th the 
hurricane continued, and during the detention many old Seals 
were seen passing; they were, as their custom is, south of their 
young, and doubtless in search of food. Capt. Blandford esti- 
mates that some seventy miles of practically barren ice drifted 
past in a south-westerly direction before the whelping ice with 
the ‘‘ Whitecoats ” upon it appeared. This drift caused the pans 
bearing the young Seals to pass inside the Funks, although at 
the time he met the small patch, on the 11th of March before 
mentioned, the main body was seventy miles away in a northerly 
direction. ‘The storm which thus brought the young Seals so con- 
veniently within easy reach having somewhat abated, on-the 18th 
March the ‘Neptune,’ with the ‘Newfoundland’ in company, 
headed in a westerly direction, and at once came up with them. 
By Monday, the 20th, 16,000 Seals were panned; the next day 
15,000 more were added; and by Wednesday the total was made 
up to 41,000. ‘T'hen came the usual waste: ‘‘ the elements were 
unpropitious, and three pans were driven on the Funks and 
ground to pieces, two more went over Brenton’s Rock to destruc- 
tion, while on Sunday three pans were smashed on the Cabots, 
leaving only 32,000.” As the bulk of the Seals were obtained by 
the other vessels.in about the same locality and under the same 
conditions as to weather, it is probable that a similar loss of 
panned Seals was also experienced by them; but Capt. Blandford 
says that he was probably the greatest sufferer in this respect. I 
have said that very few old Seals were killed, in proof of which 
it may be mentioned that out of 17,286 Harps killed by the 
‘Newfoundland,’ only fifty-three were old ones. 

Four vessels—the ‘ Hope,’ the ‘ Kite,’ the ‘ Harlaw,’ and the 
‘Nimrod’—went to the Gulf fishery. None of these was very 
successful, with the exception of the ‘ Hope,’ which fell in with 


NOTES ON THE SEAL AND WHALE FISHERY. 67 


the western Harps towards the end of March, about twerty 
miles north-west of Grindstone Islands, where, reaching them 
with difficulty, she secured 26,586. The ‘ Kite’ struck the Seals 
in the same locality somewhat later, with every prospect of 
securing a good cargo, but in answer to signals of distress from 
the s.s. ‘Gaspia,’ a trader which was fast in the ice, left the 
sealing to go to her assistance, eventually convoying her safely 
into St. John’s, but having captured only 699 Seals. The 
‘Harlaw’ and the ‘Nimrod’ hunted in company in the neigh- 
_ bourhood of Cape St. George, the former capturing 1570 old and 
2476 young Hoods (equal in weight to about 9000 young Harps), 
and the latter 3711 of the same species. ‘These Hooded Seals 
are said to have been of an enormous size, but their capture was 
attended with considerable danger and labour, as the vessels 
could not get within three miles of the sheet on which they were, 
and the intervening ice was much broken and rafted. 

Mr. Thorburn tells me that, owing to the severity of the frost 
in the month of February, the ice in the Gulf was unusually 
heavy, in consequence of which the eastern Harps were not seen 
at all, and the schooners fishing there made a very bad season; 
he estimates that the number of Seals which fell to these 
schooners, and to the shore fishers in Bonavista Bay, did not 
~ much exceed 20,000. 

The total number of Seals captured by the eighteen steamers, 
of the aggregate capacity of 5500 tons, and manned by some 
3500 seamen, was 268,787 (against 241,708 in the previous 
season), of a net value of £68,527, the price of produce being 
very disappointing. The bulk of the vessels were fairly fished, 
nine having more than 15,000: the ‘ Neptune’ taking the lead 
with 32,129; five others had above 10,000, and the remaining 
four from three to four thousand each, with the exception of the 
‘Kite,’ which, as already explained, was otherwise occupied, and 
killed only 699 Seals. The average of the whole was 14,932. 
The fishing in the past season, although the ice had been heavy 
and the weather rough, has been singularly free from disaster, 
and had prices ruled better would have been highly successful. 

The Norwegian sealers, I have been informed, did very badly, 
and they are gradually being sold out of the trade; the Bottle- 
nose fishery also produced about one-third less than in the 

F 2 


68 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


previous season, the scarcity causing oil of this class to advance 
to £28 per ton. 

With reference to the Fin- Whale fishery recently established 
by the ‘ Cabot Whale-fishing Company” (see Notes for 1698, 
p. 107), Mr. Thorburn has been kind enough to obtain for me 
the following particulars:—The ‘Cabot’ fished in Hermitage 
Bay in the end of February and during the month of March, 
killing eleven Whales, all ‘‘ Sulphur-bottoms.” This species 
was found in plenty in the locality named until the middle of 
July, and any number could have been taken had the Company 
been in a position to deal with them. Mr. Thorburn’s informant 
states that these immense Whales appear nearly always to be in 
good condition, and he believes they reproduce only once in 
three years. From the middle of July until the first week in 
October the ‘Cabot’ fished in Notre Dame Bay, killing ninety- 
eight Whales, nine of them ‘“ Humpbacks,”’ the remainder 
being ‘“ Finbacks.” In October these Whales become scarce 
and poor in condition, owing it is believed to their reproducing 
some time previous to that date, and being engaged suckling 
their young; they then leave the coast, probably following their 
food supply. The ninety-eight Whales yielded 286 tons of oil 
and six tons of bone; the oil produced about £17 per ton; the 
** Whale-bone,”’ I imagine, would be of little value. It will be 
observed that, in speaking of the Whales killed by the Cabot 
Company, I have used only the popular names applied to them 
by their captors; this I have done advisedly, for, in addition to the 
uncertainty with regard to their true species, and the unsettled 
state of the nomenclature of the group, it was impossible to 
speak with authority without opportunities of personal investiga- 
tion, and might only add to the existing confusion ; it is there- 
fore with pleasure that I hear from Dr. F. W. True, of the 
United States National Museum, that he spent a month at the 
station last summer, and that he hopes to do for the Newfound- 
land Fin-Whales what Mr. A. H. Cocks and Prof. Robert 
Collett have already done for a similar fishery on the coast 
of Lapland. It is Dr. True’s intention shortly to make known 
the general result of his investigations, which will eventually be 
embodied in a contemplated monograph of the Finbacks of the 
American waters. Dr. True has already published in the ‘ Pro- 


NOTES ON THE SHAL AND WHALE FISHERY. 69 


ceedings of the United States National Museum’ (xxi. pp. 617- 


635) an exhaustive paper on the nomenclature of the Whalebone 
Whales of the European waters, treated with his usual thorough- 
ness ; and, whether or not European cetologists finally accept the 
somewhat startling changes he advocates, they cannot but be 
grateful for the analysis of the evidence on which he bases his 
conclusions. It is rather out of place in this paper to discuss 


the much-vexed question of the revision of nomenclature, but the 


well-defined and not too numerous group of Cetacea seems 


readily to lend itself for treatment in this respect, and surely by 
a little forbearance and the sacrifice of some degree of senti- 
ment, cetologists might be able to arrive at an arrangement by 
which this section at least of the Mammalia might be cleared of 


the nomenclatorial fog which surrounds it, and be settled once 


for all on a firm and universal basis. 
The Whale fishery in the past season has on the whole been 
fairly successful, but its most remarkable feature has been the 


- continued apparent absence of Right Whales in the Greenland 


Seas, whereas in Davis Strait and in the adjoining waters they 
have been seen in abundance. ‘The ‘ Balena’ cruised for three 
months in the Greenland waters, during which time she saw only 


~ one Whale; this she captured on the 19th of May, on the north- 


west fishing-grounds. It is difficult to account for this absence 
of Whales from their former resorts, but it is doubtless due in 
part to overfishing, and perhaps even more to the present unsuit- 
able condition of their feeding grounds owing to the continued 


absence of ice, a state of things which has continued for a 


most unusual length of time, and is quite contrary to precedent 
(see Zool. 1898, p. 72). In Davis Strait, on the other hand, 
Whales were in plenty in all their usual resorts, but from the 
many ‘“‘escapes” it is probable they were very shy. There 
appears also to be a fair proportion of old and young fish, which 
promises well for the continuance of the species. The ‘ Diana’ 
killed a mother and sucker in Lancaster Sound, early in July; 
also two other small Whales in the same locality. The ‘Kclipse’ 
also killed a very small Whale of four-foot bone, in Pond’s Bay, 
where young fish are rarely met with. In the same locality the 
‘Diana’ met with a fighting fish which gave them some trouble; 
but although it attacked several of the boats, it was eventually 


70 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


killed without injury to the crews. The bulk of the Whales seen ~ 
or captured were of good size, some of them very large. | 

The ‘ Balena,’ as already mentioned, was the only whaler in 
the Greenland Seas. After cruising in the usual resorts of the 
Whales and seeing only one, which she captured, Capt. Robertson 
made for the east coast of Greenland in search of Walruses, and 
there he twice met with the Swedish expedition under Dr. Nath- 
rost, rendering what aid he was able in the fruitless search for 
Andrée. Here ten Musk Oxen were killed, and some valuable 
explorations made, which will be duly reported by Dr. Nathrost. 
Finally the ‘ Balena’ went round to Davis Strait, where she 
killed two other fine Whales off Coutts Inlet, making her cargo 
three Whales, ten Musk Oxen, eleven Bears, three Narwhals, and 
seven Walrus. 

The ‘ Diana’ was very successful, killing ten Whales, mostly 
in Lancaster Sound and Coutts Inlet. There was nothing 
remarkable in her voyage except her success, her cargo con- 
sisting of ten Whales, seventy-one Walrus, fourteen Bears, 
twenty-two Seals, and three Narwhals. 

The ‘Nova Zembla” also did well at the Davis Strait fishery, 
returning with eight Whales and nine Bears. 

The ‘ Eclipse’ left Dundee at the end of April, and killed © 
her first Whale off Disco on the 19th of May. North of Melville 
Bay Capt. Milne visited an Esquimaux settlement—Tiganrock— — 
obtaining news of Lieut. Peary ; thence she crossed over to 
HKclipse Sound, which she navigated to its extremity, finding 
traces of Ksquimaux and killing fifteen Reindeer; but, although 
she saw a considerable number of Whales, fortune went against 
her, and she only succeeded in capturing three (one very small), 
as already mentioned, and reached Dundee on November 14th, 
experiencing very wild weather on her homeward voyage. 

The ‘EKsquimaux’ also went to Davis Strait, but I am 
informed that her voyage was not entirely of a business cha- 
racter; as, however, she brought home two Whales, yielding 
23 tons of oil and 21 ewt. of bone, in addition to forty Walruses, 
twenty-three Bears, and sundry seals, worth some £2000, the 
produce would go a long way towards paying the expenses of the 
trip. 

Two other vessels left Dundee, the ‘ Active’ and the ‘Polar | 


NOTES ON THE SEAL AND WHALE FISHERY. 71 


Star,’ bound for Hudson Strait, the former repeating her voyage 
of the previous season. The entrance to Hudson Strait, always 
very unapproachable in the spring owing to the accumulation of 
ice and the boisterous weather experienced at that season, was 
more than usually blocked by the drift of ice from Davis Strait, 
and the two vessels were twenty-eight days later in entering the 
Strait than they anticipated, even then they forced a passage 
with difficulty. The terrible squeezing and buffeting they expe- 
rienced told severely on the ‘ Polar Star,’ a vessel thirty years 
old, which, after being frequently beset, had finally to be aban- 
_doned in a sinking condition early in October, the ‘ Active,’ 
which had been standing by her companion for some time taking 
on board her crew and saving one hundred and thirty-two Walrus 
hides and four Bears. The ‘ Active’ saw very few Whales, and 
did not succeed in catching any, the result of her voyage being 
one hundred and seventy-three Walruses, thirty-four Bears, and 
fifty-eight Musk Ox skins, the latter obtained from the natives 
on the mainland to the west of Rowe’s Welcome. Late in the 
season the weather was very wild, and on two occasions seventy- 
three in the one case and one hundred and nine Walruses in the 
other, which had been killed and left on the shore, were washed 
away and lost during terrific gales. An American vessel which 
wintered in the Strait secured eight Whales in June and July, 
before the ‘Active’ got upon the fishing ground, and when 
spoken had the produce of sixteen Whales on board. As it is 
evident the vessels despatched from Scotland must arrive too 
late to take full advantage of the fishery in this locality, 
Mr. Kinnes resolved to establish a station in Fisher Strait, on 
the shore of Southampton Island. For this purpose the first 
mate of the ‘ Active,’ Mr. J. W. Murray, with two others, were 
landed, a large wooden dwelling-house and boat-shed having 
been taken out in sections for their use; here they contemplate 
remaining for three years, Whale hunting, assisted by five boats’ 
crews of natives. 

The only other vessel bringing produce from the Arctic was 
the carrying ship ‘ Alert,’ of Peterhead, which brought home the 
produce of two Whales, 150 Walruses, and 2900 Seals, from the 
Cumberland Gulf stations. 

Seven vessels left Dundee in the past season; one of these, 


72 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


the ‘ Polar Star,’ was lost, and the ‘ Alert’ returned from Cum- 
berland Gulf. The total produce of these eight vessels was 
28 Whales, 609 Walruses, 16 Narwhals, 3036 Seals, 128 Bears, 
and 68 Musk Oxen; the oil yielded was 385 tons, and the bone 
350 cwt.—a very mixed cargo; but, except for the Hudson Bay 
section of the fleet, apparently a fairly successful voyage com- 
mercially. There has been no very recent sale of whalebone, but 
I am informed that the last sale effected produced £1400 per ton ; 
more is being asked for it now. Whale oil is producing from £18 to 
£19, and Seal oil from £18 to £21 per ton. Walrus hides, 
if heavy, bring as high as £40 each. They are used for polishing 
wheels for bicycle work, and therefore should be very thick; 
light hides are of little use, and not in request, therefore of little 
value. The total value of the produce of the season, estimating 
the bone at the last selling price, and allowing for undersize, 
would probably be about £38,000. 

As part of the produce of the late voyage, sixty-eight Musk 
Oxen will be noticed; ten of these were from East Greenland, 
the remainder from the mainland of Arctic America in the form 
of skins procured from the natives. This is sad reading, for not 
only does it threaten the extinction of this most interesting animal, 
but also of one of the food supplies of the Indians and Esquimaux 
of this sterilesland, who maintain at the best a very precarious 
existence on the flesh of the Reindeer, the Walrus, and the Musk 
Ox; should these supplies fail the natives will undoubtedly 
perish, a fate which has already to a great extent befallen their 
brethren to the west of Bering’s Strait. Before the natives 
became possessed of firearms they could by their primitive 
methods obtain sufficient food for their wants, and skins for their 
tents and winter clothing, without undue sacrifice of life; but 
their capacity for destruction was limited. Since however they 
have been supplied with modern weapons they still destroy life 
to the utmost of their ability, without thought for the future, 
and, forgetful of their own wants, exchange the skins with white 
traders to an extent only limited by their capacity for slaughter,* 


* My friend Mr. Kinnes, I am glad to say, tells me that this does not 
apply to the Walrus, for on enquiry by the captain of the ‘ Active’ for skins 
of these animals, the natives told them that they only killed what they 
wanted for themselves, which they considered quite enough. 


; Sie 


NOTES ON THE SHAL AND WHALE FISHERY. 73 


not for necessaries only, but for luxuries they did better without 
in the past. The Musk Ox is one of the easiest of wild animals 
to approach, and as the demand for their skins is unlimited and 


~ the supply very much the reverse, it is by no means unlikely that 


the species will be exterminated before its life-history is fully 
studied by naturalists. Although not difficult to capture, and 
easy to manage when young,* the only living examples which 
have hitherto been brought to this country are two young ones, 
unfortunately both males, recently added to the Duke of Bed- 
ford’s collections at Woburn. 

The above are not the whole of these animals which have 
been captured during the past year; fortunately those I am about 
to mention were made a better use of. Dr. Nathrost, writing of 
his recent expedition to Kast Greenland (Geo. Jour. Nov. 1899, 
vol. xiv. pp. 534-37), and referring to the zoological results of 


the voyage, says, ‘‘ We have secured twenty-eight Musk Oxen, all 


of which were prepared in some way or other, so that we had 
skeletons, skins, all the interior parts, brains, &c., brought 


| home.” ‘This is well so far, but he also mentions “the fact that 


the White Polar Wolves have made an invasion around the 
northern part of Greenland along the whole coast, at least to 
Scoresby Sound,” and that “the Reindeer are now very scanty 
in consequence of their having been killed by the Wolves,” a fate 
too likely to be shared by the Musk Oxen. 

My thanks, as on former occasions, are especially due to 
Mr. Michael Thorburn, of St. John’s, Newfoundland, and Mr. 
Robert Kinnes, of Dundee, for their kindness in supplying me 
with much valuable information. 


* See Buffalo Jones’s ‘ Forty Years of Adventure,’ p. 382, et seg., for an 
account of lassoing young Musk Oxen near Chesterfield Inlet. 


14 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


ON SEXUAL DIFFERENCES IN THE WING OF 
THE HOUSE-SPARROW (PASSER DOMESTICUS). 


By Artuur G. Butuer, Ph.D., &e. 


In a short article on the wing of the Sky-Lark, which I pub- 
lished in ‘ The Zoologist’ for 1898, I expressed my intention of 
noting the sexual differences in wing-structure of other species. 
Mr. C. H. B. Grant again assisted me with wings of three male 
and three female specimens of the domestic Sparrow; I already 
possessed five others, and subsequently Mr. F. W. Frohawk 
added to my collection. I therefore thought I could not do 
better than select this as an additional example in proof of the 
fact that, as a rule, the wings of male birds are better adapted to 
swift flight than those of their mates, thus enabling the former to 
overtake the latter when courting. 

Of the six wings which Mr. Grant secured for me, all are 
carefully labelled, but in five of them the important note is 
added of the actual length of the bird in the flesh from which 
the wing was removed. As will at once be seen, this is a point 
of considerable importance, as it proves that, although individuals 
vary slightly in size, there is no great discrepancy in the total 
length of the sexes in the flesh. The following are measure- 
ments of three males :— 


1. Totallength . . . 62 inches. 

2. 99 99 ° ° ° 64 9? 

3. 99 99 . ° e 63 29 
Of two females the measurements are :— 

1. Total length . . . 63 inches. 

2. 99 99 U : ° 63 9 


Comparing the expanded wings of the sexes in the same 
specimens, we get the following interesting results :— 


1. Total length . -. ‘.-4 inches. 
Males 42. __,, by Oe eed io: Se 
Oo. 9 9 e . © 33 9 
Aetinler ae ieneth .Se ee . ts 
9 ” e e . ° T6é 99 


WING OF THE HOUSE-SPARROW. 75 


Thus the largest hen, although a bigger bird than the largest 
cock, measures half an inch less in entire length of wing, this 
difference being due entirely to the lengthening of the second to 
the fifth primaries, with their coverts, in the male birds. These 
same feathers are often, though by no means invariably, narrower 
in the females than in the males, and when this is the case the 
resisting power of the wing must be considerably weakened. 

The width of the wing from back to front shows little, if any, 
sexual difference, the secondaries being about of equal length in 
male and female; the natural effect of breadth without corre- 
spondingly developed length would be to produce a somewhat 
heavier and slower flight, so that in every respect the male bird 
has the advantage. 


76 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM MID-WALEKS. 
By J. H. Satrer, University College, Aberystwyth. 


Tue following notes, referring to the past two years, are in 
continuation of those which appeared in ‘ The Zoologist’ (1898, 
pp. 198-201) :— 

A Cirl Bunting was singing upon Jan. 8th, 1898. This species 
with us appears to sing much more freely in winter than the 
Yellowhammer does. A visit paid to a small Heronry upon 
March 28th showed that these birds vie with the Raven in the 
matter of early breeding. In one nest voung birds were calling 
loudly. There were egg-shells under two other nests, while a 
fourth contained three small young ones, and an egg which was 
hatching. On April 7th the young birds of the first mentioned 
brood were flying from tree to tree. At Craig-y-Pistyll, on 
March 28th, a pair of Ravens had a nest with five fresh eggs. It 
was found ‘with difficulty, being inconspicuous amongst the 
heather and brambles which grew from the ledges of the crag. 

While staying at Abergwesyn, in the extreme west of Brecon- 
shire, I noticed with interest the Nuthatch upon the trees— 
almost the last in this direction—close to the hotel. It does not 
cross the mountains, and hence only occurs very exceptionally 
upon their western or Cardiganshire side. 

On April 9th I visited one of the few remaining breeding 
haunts of the Kite, an oak wood covering the slopes of a rocky 
hill. The pair of birds soon appeared, and, as they soared, 
showed their graceful flight to perfection. In turning, one or the 
other would often “‘ throw over” almost on to its back against 
the stiff breeze. The nest, about thirty feet from the ground in 
an oak, being a new one, was small as compared with the size 
attained when utilized year after year. It contained two eggs, 
indicating that in this district the Kite breeds about a fortnight 
earlier than the Buzzard. A very large nest, from which, to my 
knowledge, Kites’ eggs were taken in 18938, proved to be grass- 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM MID-WALES. it 


grown and untenanted. ‘lhe Common Buzzard, though the tate 
of the Kite inevitably awaits it, is still fairly numerous, and 
eleven pairs were found breeding within a radius of perhaps five 
miles from our headquarters. Two presumably young and in- 
experienced birds had built about twenty feet from the ground in 
a small sycamore, one of.the few trees surrounding a ruined 
sheep-fold upon the open moor. 

On April 30th newly-arrived Pied Flycatchers, all of them 
males, were singing amongst the birches. A pair of Ravens, in 
the Nant Brenig, had three fully-fledged young ones just ready 
to leave the nest. A pair of White Wagtails upon Borth golf- 
links on May 13th were evidently on passage. ‘here were three 
or four Turnstones on the strand, and an Oystercatcher’s nest 
contained four eggs; I have never previously found more than 
three. On the 16th many Wheatears at Clarach were still on 
migration. A Wood Wren’s nest was almost entirely composed 
of fir-needles. A Whinchat, singing with strange unfamiliar 
variations, so that I at first took it to be a Sedge Warbier, 
recalled the suggestions which have lately been made as to the 
power of mimicry-in this species. 

On June 4th I visited a colony of Lesser ‘l'erns near Towyn, 
and found the birds in about their usual numbers. Walking over 
the moors from the Teifi Pools to Cwm Ystwyth, on June 8th, I 
met with one pair of Golden Plover and several Dunlin, which 
were evidently breeding. The note of the latter bird, in the 
nesting season, is like the shrill rattle of a pea-whistle. Capt. 
Cosens informed me that a pair of Turtle-Doves bred in his 
grounds at Bronpadarn. On June 20th I heard the Manx 
Shearwater’s note about 11.30 p.m. 

During a few days spent in Snowdonia at the end of June 
several pairs of Choughs were seen. In company with Ravens, 
they frequent the cliffs of Clogwyn dur Arddu. In the Nant 
Francon a nest of young Ring-Ouzels in the loose stone wall by 
the roadside was most conspicuous. Revisiting the same neigh- 
bourhood three months later, 1 found the Wheatear and Ring- 
Ouzel, on Sept. 23rd, still lingering near the summit of Carnedd 
Llewelyn. Four Ravens frequented the Glyders. Stonechats 
were numerous at Pen-y-gwryd, where they came into the hotel 
garden. A pair of Buzzards, the only ones met with, were seen 


78 THE ZOOLOGIST: 


in Cwm Dyli, on the tlanks of Snowdon, and during an ascent of 
that mountain I noticed a Fox crossing the ridge of Crib-y- 
Ddysgyl just below the summit. 

At Aberystwyth, on Oct. 4th, a Stonechat sang a few strains 
at dusk; I had not previously known this species as an autumn 
songster. On the 15th Mr. Hutchings showed me a Spotted 
Crake just setup. In November Bramblings appeared under the 
beech trees. ‘They seem to visit us biennially, missing the alter- 
nate years when there is no beech-mast. On Nov. 12th I received 
a Polecat from Nanteos. 

The rest of my notes refer to the past year. 

On Jan. 18th Mr. Hutchings showed me an immature speci- 
men of the Little Gull. It was obtained during rough weather 
about nine days previously. A few bright warm days about 
Feb. 20th brought the Stonechats into song. On the 28th I 
received a very large male Polecat from the same locality as the 
previous one. 

Upon March Ist, St. David’s Day, visiting a nesting site of 
the Raven upon the coast about six miles south of this town, I 
found, as the glass showed, that the birds had refitted their old 
nest, which already contained an egg or eggs. About this date 
Curlew were constantly on the move, passing inland to their 
breeding quarters ; they were to be heard at all hours of the day 
and night. On March 11th Herons were already sitting. A 
small party of Lesser Redpolls in alders at Llanilar were, with 
one exception, the first that [ have met with in this county. On 
March 28th a Raven’s nest in the Nant Berwyn, near Tregaron, 
contained three incubated eggs. ‘The birds were furious, and 
came within ten yards of us, the cock tearing up soil and grass 
with his bill. ‘Two days later I saw four Wood Larks on the 
wing at Llanbadarn. About two hundred and fifty Golden Plover 
were resting on the sands at the mouth of the Dovey on April 
19th. On the 23rd a Wheatear was singing well at 11.45 p.m., a 
fair moonlight night. On April 26th, and again three days later, 
I heard the note of the Nutnatch in Cwm Woods. I have never 
previously identified this bird at Aberystwyth, though always on 
the look-out for it during the past eight years. A Pied Flycatcher 
was singing amongst the oaks at Nanteos on May 7th. 

Birds were never in better voice than during the first half of 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM MID-WALES 79 


the month, the wet evidently suiting them. I found the pair of 
Kites again attempting to breed in the same locality as last year. 
On May 28rd they were lining a newly-built nest, situated in the 
same tree and in the same fork as five years ago. This was 
evidently the second attempt of the season. An old nest was 
lined with rolls of sheep’s wool. A pair of Buzzards had a nest 
with a single young one, resting against a shrub of birch on the 
steep hillside, with scarcely anything of a fall belowit. A pair 
of Ravens, which had three young uearly ready to fly, did not 
venture within a quarter of a inile of us, their behaviour being 
thus strikingly different from that of the above-mentioned pair. 
Pied Flycatchers were breeding freely, often in disused nesting- 
holes of the Green or Greater Spotted Woodpecker. Examining 
a number of Jackdaws’ nests in the cliff, I found in many cases 
the whole brood dead, as the result of the cold wet weather at 
Whitsuntide. In June I heard the note of the Quail in two 
localities some six miles apart. 

On Sept. 7th I noted a pair of Choughs passing over the hill 
at the northern end of the town. A Black Redstart frequented 
the College roof for at least a fortnight, basking upon the leads 
every fine day, and hawking for flies from the lightning-conductors. 
I last saw it on Nov. 6th. On Nov. Ist Thrushes and Blackbirds 
on migration were beating against the College windows after dark. 
Mr. Hutchings showed me a curious light-coloured variety of the 
Polecat on Dec. 29th, and reported three or four Bitterns obtained 
during the frost. 


80 THE ZOOLOGIST., 


OBITUARY. 


Dr. EwvpuroTrt Cougs. 


ANOTHER first-rate ornithologist has, we regret to say, gone 
home to his last resting-place, and will be sorely missed, not 
only in America, but also in Kurope, and especially in England, 
where he was personally known to so many of us. 

Dr. Elliott Coues, who passed away on Christmas Day last 
at the comparatively early age of fifty-seven, was not only a 
most painstaking and hard-working cabinet naturalist, but 
equally good as a field naturalist, as shown by the good field- 
work he did during the many years he served as assistant-surgeon 
in the U.S. army. Not only was he one of the first authorities 
on North American ornithology, but he also did excellent work, 
in conjunction with Mr. J. A. Allen, in the study of North 
American mammals, and especially in the publication of their 
work on the ‘ Fur-bearing Animals.’ His separately published 
works, by which his name is best known, are the ‘ Key to North 
American Birds,’ ‘ Vhe Birds of the North-West,’ ‘The Birds 
of the Colorado Valley,’ and ‘ Check-List of North American 
Birds’; but besides these, his various articles in periodicals are 
numerous, and of considerable value. 

Dr. Coues was an unusually hard worker, as no trouble was 
too great for him when working out a difficult problem; and he 
was also enthusiastic to a degree. On whatever subject he 
wrote he displayed great originality of thought, and his pen was 
verily that of a ready writer. A firm friend and an excellent 
companion, he was also, as so often is the case, a somewhat 
bitter enemy. 

The writer and he have been on friendly terms during the 
past thirty years, and when he was in England he stayed with 
him, and many and pleasant were the discussions on ornithology 
that took place, especially those on trinomial nomenclature, on 
which each held very different views. 


OBITUARY. 81 


Dr. Coues, who was one of the founders of the American 
Ornithologists’ Union, and at one time its President, became 
Professor of Zoology and Comparative Anatomy at Norwich 
University, Vermont, in 1869, and held the chair of Anatomy in 
the National Medical College from 1877 to 1883. For some 
months prior to his death he had been in bad health, and on the 
6th of December underwent a serious surgical operation; his 
death, which took place at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, Balti- 
more, resulting from the same. 

H. E. D. 


Dr. Kart Russ. 


Dr. Kart Russ, the eminent German student of bird-life, 
died on Sept. 29th, 1899. By his death both scientific aviculture 
-and ornithology have sustained a severe loss. 

Dr. Russ was always careful either personally to describe, or 
to obtain accurate descriptions of, the young plumage of all 
birds bred in captivity, from the egg until the change to the 
adult plumage ; he noted the character and number of eggs, the 
duration of incubation, the age at which the young left the nest, 
and that at which their adult plumage was attained. Lastly, he 
carefully noted the colouring and variation in the soft parts in 
every adult bird which he described. 

Russ was the son of an apothecary, and was born on Jan. 14th, 
1833; he was therefore only in his sixty-seventh year when he 
died ; yet he lived to complete the last volume of what he himself 
calls “the principal work” of his life in 1898, and saw it published 
in 1899. 

‘Die Fremdlandischen Stubenvogel,’ in four volumes, with 
effective (though hardly scientific) chromo-lithographic plates, is 
well worth the consideration of the most exclusive ornithologists ; 
they may find much therein which will be new to them—facts as 
to seasonal changes of plumage, which some have hesitated to 
believe in, are proved by actual experience ; several differences 
in the colouring of soft parts are indicated; with many other 
details of importance. 

Be Gra B. 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., February. 1900. G 


82 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


AVES. 


Early Appearance of Chiffchaff.—On Dec. 31st I saw and watched 
for some time, with a field-glass in my garden here, a specimen of the 
Chiffchaff (Phylloscopus rufus) ; it appeared quite lively, and was busily 
engaged searching for insects among some evergreen shrubs. I consider 
this a very late appearance for this well-known Warbler.—W. J. WILLIaMs 
(Garville Road, Rathgar). 


Nesting Habits of Great Tit.—Referring to Mr. Aplin’s note on the 
Great Tit (Parus major) (ante, p. 19), he may not be aware that this bird 
is in the habit of covering its eggs till it has laid the full clutch, or nearly 
so. For some years past Great Tits have nested in our boxes here, 
frequently six or eight pairs in a season, and often the removal of the lid 
has revealed an apparently unfinished nest, which has contained three or 
four eggs covered with fur or wool. Perhaps I may add that we have had 
as tenants of our nest-boxes here the Redstart, Great Tit, Blue Tit, Cole 
Tit, Marsh Tit, Nuthatch, House-Sparrow, Starling, and Wryneck; and a 
neighbour who lives in an adjoining village has repeatedly had Tree- 
Sparrows nesting in his boxes.—JuLtian G. Tuck (Tostock Rectory, Bury 
St. Edmunds, Suffolk). 


Great Grey Shrike in Suffolk.—A very perfect example of the race (or 
species) of Great Grey Shrike (Lanius excubitor), with one spot on the wing, 
was shot at Risby, near Bury St. Edmunds, about Nov. 20th. By the 
delicate pale grey of the back, and the very slight indications of markings 
on the breast, it appears to be a fully adult bird.—Jutian G. Tuck (Tostock 
Rectory, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk). 


Red-billed Chough,—At the last meeting of the Hampstead Scientific 
Society, I was enabled to exhibit a very fine mounted specimen of the 
Red billed Chough (Pyrrhocoraaz graculus), which was shot from among a 
flock of Rooks near Hendon during last summer (1899). The bird was 
brought in the flesh to Mr. J. E. Whiting, of Heath Street, for preserva- 
tion.— Basin W. Martin (6, Holly Place, Hampstead). 


Hoopoe in Anglesea.— Whilst engaged in investigating the occurrence 
of rare birds in Cheshire, I recently came across a specimen of the Hoopoe 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 83 


(Upupa epops) in a keeper’s cottage at Carden, which had been shot by the 
gamekeeper at Bodyor, near Holyhead, “about twenty-two years ago.”— 
T. A. Cowarp (Bowdon, Cheshire). 


Peregrine in Suffolk.x—On Jan. 17th I saw in the flesh, at Bury St. 
Edmunds, one of the finest adult female Peregrines (Falco peregrinus) 
which has ever come under my notice, shot by a keeper within an hour's 
walk of Bury Station. Females of this species very much outnumber 
males, both in the adult and immature plumage, and I only know of two 
adult male Peregrines obtained in Suffolk—one shot at Ickworth about 
1860, which my father purchased at the time; and one (now in the Hele 
Collection in the Ipswich Museum), which struck the telegraph-wires near 
Aldeburgh in March, 1865.—Junian G. Tuck (Tostock Rectory, Bury St. 
Edmunds, Suffolk). 


Bittern near Scarborough.—Last Friday (Dec. 29th) Mr. Challinor, 
farmer, Scalby Lodge, noticed and shot a rare bird in one of his fields 
which was flooded with water. The bird proved to be a beautiful specimen 
of the Common Bittern (Botaurus stellaris), or rather it should be called 
uncommon, seeing that it is about fifteen years since the last one was 
captured on Scalby Road, and which is now ir the possession of Sir Wm. 
Fielding, Bart., South Cliff. It was brought to me to be preserved. The 
Osprey which was shot near here a few weeks ago, and which was recorded 
in the papers, also goes into Mr. Challinor’s coliection. — Jonn Morusy 
(King Street, Scarborough). 


Little Gull (Larus minutus) on the Thames.—I have recently added 
to my collection a female example of L. minutus in immature plumage. It 
was shot by Mr. E, Goodman, of Southend, who kindly gave it me shortly 
after securing it, and informed me its flight exactly resembled that of a 
small Tern. J found its gizzard contained some very small fishes’ bones. 
The occurrence of this species at the end of December is, I believe, very 
unusual, as the majority of specimens that have been observed off the 
British coasts have been in the autumn and spring migrations. As I have 
often found that the lengths of birds given in various works on ornithology 
are not very reliable—due, I fancy, to the measurements being taken from 
skins and not from birds in the flesh—it may therefore be interesting to 
note that this bird in the flesh measured in length, from tip of bill to end 
of tail, 10} in.; wing, from carpal joint to end of longest primary, 84 in. ; 
expanse of wings, 25 in.; and weight only 3} oz., although the bird was in 
excellent condition.—F. W. FroHawk. 


Winter Notes from Haddiscoe.— During the past few months sports- 
men have had little to complain of in the way of sport on the Norfolk 
G2 


84 _ THE ZOOLOGIST. 


marshes and waterways. During the month of September three Solitary 
Snipes fell victims to the Partridge guns in the locality of Haddiscoe. October 
witnessed the arrival of many Woodcocks, more than the usual comple- 
ment. Individuals are being shot even now (January) almost daily; two were 
killed quite close to my door at Christmas, and another caught in a Rabbit- 
trap. In November the migration of Snipe exceeded that of many previous 
years, especially the Jacks, which I found in plenty at favourite haunts, and 
those I shot were in fine condition, being very fat and plump. Golden 
Plover have been exceedingly scarce. With December came the cream of 
wildfowl shooting ; the short snap of winter weather in the shape of a snow- 
fall and a few sharp frosts filled the district with all kinds of wildfowl. 
Some of the gunners who went out with a shoulder-gun grumbled at bad 
luck after having bagged half a score of Duck in the space of a few hours 
by the river-side! The numbers slaughtered must have been enormous, 
the price of Wild Duck coming down as low asa shilling each. From an 
old Breydon gunner of many years’ standing I learnt he had never seen the 
like before. Such unusual numbers of wild birds brought out sportsmen of 
all ages with various firearms, and most made good bags. Fora few days 
Suipe-shooting was excellent, and so many killed that local game-dealers 
only paid fourpence each for them. As regards Coots and Moor-hens, 
dealers would not be troubled with them, owing to the great number 
of slain. On Dec. 18th, whilst walking by the side of Breydon, I observed 
fully three thousand Coots disporting themselves on the still water. On 
the approach of a gun-punt the whole host, with a mighty roar, took wing, 
alighting farther afield, only to receive more molestation from some other 
knight of the trigger. I counted eight punts containing swivel-guns of 
large calibre, with owners anxiously looking out with field-glasses for a 
shot, but the best part of the Duck-shooting was over at this date. I shot 
a specimen of the Great-crested Grebe on the Waveney. Three Goos- 
anders were also procured on the same river, beside a quantity of Tufted 
Duck and three Smew. I saw several flocks of Geese ; one flock numbered 
thirty-four. A large flock of Barnacle-Geese visited Breydon; one gunner 
shooting five. Mr. Walter Lowne, taxidermist, of Great Yarmouth, in- 
forms me that during the past six months he has received for preserving 
a beautiful specimen of the Purple Heron, shot in Suffolk ; two Bitterns of 
the common species, one shot in the parish of Martham, the other by the 
river Bure; a Grey Phalarope, shot on Breydon; and other species which 
need little attention. From what I have seen, and through information 
received from reliable sources, I find, in spite of appeals, the slaughter 
amongst Kingfishers of late has been terrible; I have seen several King- 
fishers during the winter.—Lasr Farman (Haddiscoe, Norfolk). 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 85 


Serrated Claws of the Common Heron. — In ‘ The Zoologist’ for 
January (p. 38), Mr. Stanley Lewis expresses disappointment at his in- 
ability to find in my ‘Manual of British Birds’ any “ mention of the 
serrated claws of this species.” If he turns to the Introduction, p. xxv, he 
may read that one of the distinctions of the genus Ardea—and, indeed, of 
the whole family Ardeid@ — is: ‘“ Middle claw pectinated on the inner 
edge.” In a condensed work, in which every line and almost every word 
had to be counted, it would have been a waste of space to repeat this in the 
description of each of the ten species of Herons and Bitterns which find a 
place in the British list. As for the use of this pectination, upon which 
Mr. Lewis invites an expression of opinion, I can only say that “ the bearing 
—of the small-toothed comb—lies in its application.” — Howarp SaunDERs. 


ORGANIC EVOLUTION. 


Remarks relating to Mimicry.—In Mr. C. A. Witchell’s interesting 
“Stray Notes on Mimicry ” (ante, p. 32), one or two of the facts cited in 
illustration of his views seem hardly to meet the case, or at least to be open 
tocomment. For instance, referring to a suggested tendency with animals 
**to resemble things that they like, be those things mates or surrounding 
substances,” the writer proceeds as follows :—‘ I am aware that the sexual 
passion is not credited with this effect, but we know that breeders of prize 
poultry are careful to keep their male birds from running with birds not of 
the same variety, because if they do they will ‘throw’ feathers like those of 
their companions. TI have seen this occur in a well-bred East Indian drake 
that ran with @ white Duck.”* It is not at all unusual for black Ducks, 
whatever their companions or surroundings may be, to become, after their 
first or second year, more or less speckled with white. On a farm where 
black Ducks only (a cross between Cayuga and East Indian) were kept for 
many years in succession, this was a common occurrence. The process 
ig a very gradual one. After about the second or third moult a white 
feather or two is noticed about the head, and at each succeeding moult more 
white appears, this speckling or splashing gradually increasing and spreading 
itself over the whole of the bird’s plumage. No other Ducks were kept on 
the farm, nor were there any white fowls. Again, with respect to the 
Snake-like hissing noise made by certain nesting birds, the following 
remarks occur ;—“ For a bird will hiss when on the nest, and at no other 
time, and which has yet never seen a Suake, or apparently never heard it 
hiss; such is a town-bred fowl or duck.” Sitting Ducks certainly biss in 
an unmistakable manner at an intruder, but, extensive as is the vocabulary 
of the domestic fowl, I do not remember ever hearing either a town or 


** The italics are mine. 


86 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


country hen under any circumstance make a sound which could be likened 
to a “hiss.” Farther on we find the following sentence :—* The so-called 
feigning of death seems to me to have no relation to mimicry, but to an 
exaggeration of that stillness which so many animals adopt to avoid observa- 
tion.” I think, notwithstanding that, in some instances at least, the ruse is 
carried so far as to justify its being called a feigning (or mimicry) of death 
or sleep; otherwise, in the case of the Landrail, for instance, why should the 
bird close its eyes when engaged in this piece of deception? As to reptiles 
and batrachians feigning death, one of the latter (Bombinator igneus) almost 
goes farther than this. Its aim seems to be to simulate the unattractive 
appearance of a dead Toad or Frog which has been shrivelled and dried up 
by the heat of the sun’s rays. I have seen and handled one in this state. 
It had just been taken from a roadside pond in Normandy, and at once 
went through this singular performance. Flattening and depressing its 
body in a wonderful manner, at the same time closing the eyes and throwing 
up the head and all four limbs into the air, it thus formed its whole body 
into a cup-like shape, of which the middle of the back was the deepest part. 
—G. T. Ropr. 


( 87 ) 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


A First Book in Organic Evolution. By D. Kerroor Saurs, 
A.B., M.D. Kegan Paul, Trench, Triibner & Co. Ltd. 


Tue recognition of organic evolution is well pronounced 
among American biologists, and as a rule possesses a marked 
characteristic, which by some thinkers in this country is stated 
to exhibit the traces of what is considered the Neo-Lamarckian 
heresy. The present volume may, or may not, be tainted with 
an unpopular or heretical consideration of the inheritance of 
acquired characters, but there is much more profitable subject- 
matter to be found in its pages than the search for soundness of 
view as regards this dogma, while probably the author may be 
pronounced orthodox on the point. The book “has been 
written chiefly for the use of students in the medical depart- 
ment of the Columbian University,’ and by the ophthalmic 
surgeon to the University Hospital, while its author states that 
its production has been materially assisted by the advice of Prof. 
Gill, the eminent ichthyologist. We have thus an American 
survey of the subject by a surgeon, with the suggestions of a good 
zoologist, and on the subject of evolution the special standpoint 
of the author should always be understood. 

Dr. Shute’s special knowledge thus enables him to point out 
the confusion of thought which often fails to discriminate 
between heredity and pseudo-heredity, even physicians frequently 
writing of certain diseases as hereditary, whereas congenital 
bacterial infection, or the transmission of a microbe of the 
disease through the germ-cells of the parents is the correct 
explanation. That variation may be influenced by environment 
seems to be proved by several facts adduced by the author, and 
the following may be taken as an example :—‘“‘ A certain species 
of Snail was introduced into Lexington, Virginia, a few years ago 
from Europe. In its new habitat it varied very much. One 


88 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


hundred and twenty-five varieties have been discovered there, 
sixty-seven of which are new and unknown in Kurope, the native 
home of the species.” | 

Perhaps, however, the most debatable proposition advanced 
is that human customs, morals, and religions have, “as yet, 
very slightly, if at all, influenced the germ-cells,” and are to be 
considered as ‘“‘acquired (somatic) characteristics,’ and “ pre- 
eminently the creations of environment.’ As an illustration we 
are told—what most would explain by a totally different reason— 
that if ‘infants of a Catholic family which is descended from a 
long line of Catholic ancestors were to be placed and retained in 
a purely Mohammedan environment, heredity would carry no 
Christian customs, morals or religion into that environment,” 
but that Mohammedanism would replace and prevail. We think 
this is a wider question than can be decided by the influence of 
germ-cells, and does not appertain to organic evolution at all. 

The chapter on “‘ Natural Selection ’’ is a good résumé of the 
most advanced. theories on the question; that on the evolution 
of Man required more space to bring it sufficiently in line with 
recent anthropology; but in all the discussions on the different 
phases of organic evolution many new or little-known facts are 
introduced. 

This small volume is always suggestive, and when we cannot 
see our way to agree with its writer, we are at least stimulated 
to fresh fields of thought. In the list of ‘‘ Works of Reference ”’ 
which forms ‘‘ Section VIII.” we have been unable to find among 
the names of authors that of Ernst Haeckel. 


Fifteen Years’ Sport and Life in the Hunting Grounds of Western 
America and British Columbia. By W. A. Batuuie- 
Grouman. Horace Cox. 


THis is a book primarily for the sportsman who has the 
strength, and possesses the opportunities, to visit.the wildest 
parts of a now unfashionable continent, for Africa and not North 
America is at present considered the hunter’s paradise. And yet 
this need not be arule made too absolute, for we read:—“ There 
are even to-day countries, the size of small kingdoms, in British 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 89 


North America, into which no hunting party has ever penetrated, 
and where the frying pan’s capacity of a few isolated prospectors 
has, so far, measured the destruction of game; countries where 
Moose, Caribou, and Antelope-Goat are still unfamiliar with the 
sight of white-skinned human beings.” 

The zoologist will find much worth reading and remembering 
in the chapters—amongst others—devoted to the Wapiti and 
the Antelope-Goat (Haplocerus montanus), though he will wish 
there were even more facts relating to the life-histories of these 
animals, and less discussion of record heads and antlers, which, 
after all, pertain more to the fame of the trophies of a hall than 
to the real treasure of a zoological museum. In fact, these 
monster heads seem to provoke too much emulation and appa- 
rent heart-burnings among their fortunate possessors, and the 
zoological reader may well skip the results of the measuring-tape 
and enjoy and profit by the beautiful illustrations of the heads 
themselves. 7 

This book cannot be pronounced a genial production : there 
is too much criticism; scarcely any authority quoted seems free 
from error of commission or omission, so that we frequentiy— 
too frequently—are transported from the beauties of nature to 
the more confined area of the forum for the purpose of critical 
discussion. 

The chapter devoted to ‘‘ The Salmon of the Pacific Slope ”’ 
contains much information apart from the correction of Dr. 
Gunther. The reproduction of the instantaneous photograph 
of a Salmon leaping an eighteen-feet-high fall in Labrador is a 
charming contribution to art and zoology. 


ee 


British Dragonflies (Odonata). By W. J. Lucas, B.A., F.E.S, 
7 L. Upcott Gill. 


Mr. Lucas has found the subject for a much-needed book in 
British Entomology. The Dragonflies were certainly collected 
by some, and known to a few, but to the general British zoologist 
they were little understood, identified with difficulty, and hence 
—apart from specialists—received scant attention. Their life- 
histories can only be unravelled by skill and patience; for the 


90 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


breeding of Odonata is attended with more difficulty than that of 
Lepidoptera, and a volume like the present is an incentive to 
that task, and is also provocative to observation. 

‘‘ Of recent Dragonflies Linneus knew only fifty-six species in 
the middle of last century, Baron de Selys Longchamps gave 1344 
as the total in 1871. In 1890 Kirby could bring the lst up to 
1800, and thought that the number might be quadrupled, if only 
the group were more thoroughly worked. The total for Europe 
is just over a hundred, while in Britain there are forty.” Of 
these last Mr. Lucas considers two as being synonymic, and this 
brings the number—including occasional visitors—to thirty-nine. 

Many modern authorities now either treat the Odonata as a dis- 
tinct order, or as a section of the Orthoptera; Mr. Lucas decides 
still to regard the Dragonflies as part of the Neuroptera. Without 
being a specialist in the study of these insects, he seems to have 
read up the literature with trouble and care, and to have consulted 
the records of captures sufficiently to give a good account of the 
distribution of each species in Britain. The illustrations leave 
little to be desired; the sexes of each species are portrayed in 
coloured plates, while many good figures ornament the text. In 
a purely entomological publication—which this Journal is not— 
many points might be discussed which are dealt with in the 
volume; it sufficeth us to regard it as a contribution to British 
Zoology which was wanted, which will be welcomed by most 
naturalists, and which has been produced in a handsome and 
thorough manner. 


Recent Foraminifera: a Descriptive Catalogue of Specimens 
dredged by the U.S. Fish Com. Steamer ‘ Albatross.’ By 
James N. Fuint, M.D., U.S.N. Washington; Government 
Printing Office. 


Tu1s publication is the zoological strength of the Report of . 
the U.S. National Museum for the year ending June 80th, 1897, 
and which hasjust been printed and received. 

We read that material from above one hundred and twenty- 
five stations has been carefully studied, and specimens from 
more than a hundred localities have been preserved and iden- 
tified. Of these localities, fifty-eight are in the North Atlantic 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 91 


Ocean, twenty-one in the Gulf of Mexico, seven in the Caribbean 
Sea, one in the South Pacific, and five in the North Pacific. The 
depths at these stations vary from 7 to 2512 fathoms. The classi- 
fication followed is that of Mr. Brady in the ‘ Challenger’ reports. 

Zoologists seem sometimes to forget these primitive forms of 
animal life, and yet how little we know of their life-histories! 
** How the function of nutrition is accomplished, and the nature 
and condition of the organic material used as food by these 
minute animals is not yet determined.” ‘Of the process of 
reproduction little is known beyond the fact of multiplication by 
gemmation and fission.” The Foraminifera are therefore still in 
search of their interpreter. Their iconograpber has not been 
undiscoverable. This most interesting memoir is illustrated by 
no fewer than eighty beautiful plates. 

Most English readers will remember these animals as having 
formed the pabulum of Huxley’s classical lecture ‘‘ On a Piece of 


Chalk.” 


The Mycetozoa, and some Questions which they Suggest. By the 
Right Hon. Sir Epwarp Fry, D.C.L., &. and AGNnEs 
Fry. ‘ Knowledge’ Office. 


Tus is a reprint from the columns of our contemporary 
‘Knowledge,’ and is devoted to the consideration of a form of 
life whose position in classification is still swb judice, being 
claimed alike by botanists and zoologists. We recently (‘ Zoolo- 
gist,’ 1899, p. 524) drew attention to a volume on the same 
subject by Prof. Macbride. It is owing to these diverse claims 
that the subject becomes matter for our pages. The present 
authors, in discussing the affinities of the Mycetozoa = Myxo- 
mycetes of Macbride, and the question as to whether they 
belong to the vegetable or animal domains—which, after all, 
reduced to their primitive conditions, are practically convertible 
terms—pronounce a qualified decision. “It almost seems as if 
the Myxies were a vagrant tribe that wander sometimes on the 
one side, and sometimes on the other side of the border-line— 
like nomads wandering across the frontier of two settled and 
adjoining states, to neither of which they belong. They would 
seem to begin life as animals, and end it as vegetables.” 


92 . THE ZOOLOGIST. — 


It is in these difficulties to enclose nature in the different 
“kraals’’ of systematic natural history that the true biological 
evidence for organic evolution is to be found. 


Biologia Animale (Zoologia Generale e Speciale) per Naturalisii, 
Medici, e Veterinart. Del Dott. GrpEonrE CoLLAMARINI. 
Milan: Ulrico Hoepli. 


Tuts is one of the latest publications in the ‘ Manuali 
Hoepli,’ and, as will be understood by the title, is an attempt in 
a small volume to condense the information which is distributed 
over a very wide field. Thus, in the introduction, we find the 
subject of Zoological Nomenclature, with a considerable number 
of rules or axioms respecting the Law of Priority. A chapter is 
devoted to Anthropology, another to Medical Zoology, and a 
third to Agricultural Zoology. These, in addition to sections 
on Anatomy, Embryology, Physiology, and Systematic Zoology, 
comprised in a small volume of 426 pages, sufficiently proclaim 
that the subject is necessarily treated in a most restricted sense, 
As the book is written in the Italian language, it is unlikely to 
be much in vogue among English readers, but is worthy of 
record as showing a widening of horizon as to special subjects, 
though distinctly peculiar in ignoring the claims of Paleontology 
to be included in its purview. It is probably intended for the 
use of schools. 


Faune de France: Les Oiseaux. Par A. Actoque. Paris: 
Bailliére et Fils. 


Tue last publication of this series—of which we have already 
noticed some other volumes—is devoted to Birds, and is written 
on precisely the same method as pusued in the treatment of other 
animals. The facilities of a synoptical classification and a 
profuse illustration are again presented to the student; and if 
the first does not always secure its object—as few of these 
attempts do—and the second are somewhat coarse, we have at 
least a manual which is inexpensive, and one which will no doubt 
prove helpful to many a young ornithologist. Over six hundred 
figures are given in the comparatively short space of 252 pages. 


( 93>) 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 


In this month’s ‘ Avicultural Magazine’ will be found the first part of 
* A Naturalist’s Notes in Ecuador,” by Mr. Walter Goodfellow, who, with 
Mr. Claud Hamilton, has spent two years in that interesting region. We 
extract the following remarks anent Humming-birds, which, the writer 
remarks, would be generally associated with sunny flower-bedecked glades : 
—“It is true that numbers of them are found (and some beautiful ones 
too) in. the hot forests of Tropical America, but they are much more 
numerous, and far more beautiful in the higher Andes; some of the 
loveliest of all being found at altitudes of between eight and thirteen 
thousand feet; whilst the little Black Hummer with a sapphire throat, 
known as Jameson’s Humming-bird, | have seen, when camping out on 
the volcano of Pichincha, Condor-shooting, flying past our tent in a heavy 
snowstorm, with its mournful twit twit, at an altitude of over fourteen 
thousand feet. I have noticed others of the same family sitting on the 
telegraph-wires (apparently a favourite post of theirs) along the dusty roads 
in the central highlands, in the most prosaic manner possible, watching, 
perchance, for passing insects, darting into the air to seize their prey on 
the wing, and always returning to the same spot. It seems to be almost a 
general rule in Ecuador that Humming-birds which make their home in 
the dense forests lack almost entirely the beautiful iridescence peculiar to 
most members of the family. But, if they lack colour, many of them have 
peculiarities of form—as,. for instance, the wonderful curved bill of the 
Hutoxeres uquila, the saw-bill of the Androdon equatorialis, and the elon- 
gated tail-feathers of the Phethornis syrmatophorus. In showing Hum- 
ming-birds’ skins to friends at home one always hears the remark, ‘ How 
_ lovely they must look flying about!’ It is true they do look pretty with 
their graceful.poses, but their wonderful colouring is generally then almost 
entirely invisible, and certainly not seen to proper advantage, many species 
looking much the same as one another in freedom, but vastly different when 
held in the hand and turned to the right light.” 


In the ‘American Naturalist’ for December last there has been pub- 
lished the account of a most instructive observation by Florence Wells 


94 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Slater on the egg-carrying habit of a water-hemipteron. It is a well-known 
fact that certain bugs of the family Belostomatide carry their eggs on their 
back until they are hatched. This has been frequently observed in the case 
of Zaitha fluminea, common in the Atlantic States. It has been taken for 
granted by all who have described this habit that it is the female that 
carries the eggs, and it has been authoritatively stated that she places them 
on her back by the aid of her ovipositor. Miss Slater, by dissection, has 
found that all the egg-carrying specimens belonged to the male sex, and 
from observations made by the aid of an aquarium found that the male was 
frequently a most unwilling bearer of these burdens of reproduction. Her 
observations “‘ indicate that the female is obliged to capture the male in 
order to deposit the eggs. Upon visiting the aquarium one afternoon a 
male was found to have a few eggs upon the caudal end of the wings. 
There was a marked difference in the colour of these, those nearest the head 
being yellow, while those nearest the caudal end were dark grey. The 
small number of the eggs indicated that the female had been interrupted in 
her egg-laying, and the difference in colour of the eggs that the process 
must be a slow one. For five hours I watched a silent unremitting 
struggle between the male and the female. Her desire was evidently to 
capture him uninjured. She crept quietly to within a few inches of him, 
and there remained immovable for half an hour. Suddenly she sprang 
towards him; but he was on the look-out, and fought so vigorously that 
she was obliged to retreat. After this repulse she swam about carelessly 
for a time, as if searching for food was her only thought. But in ten or 
fifteen minutes she was back in her first position in front of him. Again 
there was the attack, and again the repulse. The same tactics were con- 
tinued until midnight, when, despairing of her success, I left them. At 
six o'clock the next morning the entire abdomen of the male and half of 
the thorax were covered with eggs. Those nearest the head were quite 
yellow, showing that the struggle had just ended.” 


eS 


THE Marquis of Lorne has imported some Wila Turkeys from Canada, 
and turned them loose in Argyllshire. They are doing well, and Turkey- 
shooting may become an attraction of the Highlands.—Swun. 


THE Secretary of State for the Home Department has made the follow- 
ing Order under the Wild Birds Protection Acts, 1880-1896, for the 
Protection of Wild Birds and Wild Birds’ Eggs within the County of 
London. 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 95 


Tae Witp Brraps Protection (County oF Lonpon) OrpDER, 
January, 1900. Dated Jan. 10th, 1900. 


Close Time Eatended. 
II. The time during which the killing and taking of wild birds is 
prohibited by the Act of 1880 shall be extended, so far as concerns the 
county of London, so as to be from the Ist day of February to the 31st day 
of August in each year. 


Certain Birds protected during the whole of the Year. 

III. During the period from the Ist day of September in any year to 
the 31st day of January following, both days inclusive, the taking or killing 
of any of the following kinds of wild birds is prohibited throughout the 
couuty of London :— 

Bearded Tit (Reedling or Reed Pheasant), Blackbird, Blackcap, Blue 
Tit, Buntings, Buzzard, Chaffinch, Chiffchaff, Cole Tit, Coot, Cuckoo, 
Flycatchers, Garden Warbler, Golden-crested Wren, Goldfinch, Great Tit, 
Gulls, Hedge-Sparrow (or Dunnock), Hobby, Honey Buzzard, Kestrel, 
Kingfisher, Landrail (or Corncrake), Lark, Lesser Whitethroat, Linnet, 
Long-tailed Tit, Magpie, Martins, Merlin, Nightingale, Nightjar, Nut- 
hatch, Osprey, Owls, Redstart, Reed Warbler, Robin (or Redbreast), Sedge 
Warbler, Shrikes, Starling, Stonechat, Swallow, Swift, Thrushes, Wagtails, 
Wheatear, Whinchat, Whitethroat, Willow Warbler, Woodpeckers, Wood 
Warbler, Wren, Wryneck (Cuckoo’s-mate or Snake-bird). 


All Birds protected on Sundays in certain Parishes. 

IV. During the period from the lst day of September in any year to 
the 31st day of January following, both days inclusive, the taking or killing 
of wild birds on Sundays is prohibited in the following parishes in the 
county of London. [Here follows list of parishes. ] 


Additions to the Schedule of the Act of 1880. 

V. The Wild Birds Protection Act, 1880, shall apply within the county 
of London to the Bearded Tit (Reedling or Reed Pheasant), Buzzard, 
Chaffinch, Hobby, Honey Buzzard, Kestrel, Magpie, Martins, Merlin, 
Osprey, Shrikes, Swallow, Swift, and Wryneck (Cuckoo’s-mate or Snake- 
bird), as if those species were included in the schedule to the said Act, 


Hees. 
Certain Eggs protected throughout the County. 

VI. The taking or destroying of the eggs of the following wild birds is 
prohibited throughout the county of London for a period of five years from 
the date of this Order :— 

Bearded Tit (Reedling or Reed Pheasaut), Blackbird, Blackcap, Blue 
Tit, Buutings, Buzzard, Chiffchaff, Cole Tit, Coot, Cuckoo, Flycatchers, 


96. THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Garden Warbler, Golden-crested Wren, Goldfinch, Great Tit, Hawfinch, 
Hedge-Sparrow (or Dunnock), Hobby, Honey Buzzard, Kestrel, Kingfisher, 
Landrail (or Corncrake), Lark, Lesser Whitethroat, Linnet, Long-tailed 
Tit, Magpie, Martins, Merlin, Nightingale, Nightjar, Nuthatch, Osprey, 
Owls, Plover (Lapwing or Peewit), Redstart, Reed Warbler, Robin (or Red- 
breast), Sedge Warbler, Shrikes, Starling, Stonechat, Swallow, Swift, 
Thrushes, Wagtails, Wheatear, Whinchat, Whitethroat, Willow Warbler, 
Woodpecker, Wood Warbler, Wren, Wryneck (Cuckoo’s-mate or Snake-bird). 

Any person infringing this Order is liable on conviction to penalties 
not exceeding £1 for every bird or egg taken or destroyed. 


Few hard-and-fast characters used in zoological classification attain to 
the legal definitions of the Medes and Persians. ‘Thus we have ‘“ Sala- 
manders with and without Lungs,” the subject of a valuable communication 
by Dr. Lonnberg in the ‘ Zoologischer Anzeiger ’ of December last (No. 604, 
p- 545). It had been proved by Wilder, Camerano, and Moore, as well as 
by the writer of the article, that many Salamanders are normaliy deprived 
of lungs. To these Dr. Lonnberg adds two more species, and gives a list 
of those known to be without lungs, or to have these organs reduced. 
There are also a number of species which possess well although differently 
developed lungs. These Dr. Léunberg proposes to divide into two classes, 
viz. (1) such in which the lungs extend to the groin, and are about 60 per 
cent. of the length of head and body, and (2) such in which the lungs 
extend only about half-way between axilla and groin, and measure only 
from 45 to 88 per cent. of the length of the head and body. ‘‘ Camerano 
has rightly pointed out the importance of the lungs as an hydrostatic 
organ, and it seems quite probable that the great length of the lungs in 
many forms is an adaptation to aquatic life. But the lungless Salamanders 
are not necessarily obliged to lead a terrestrial life, even if many of them 
do so; on the contrary, some of them are very positively aquatic in their 
habits. In the latter case, however, they do not swim suspended in the 
middle of the water, as the species of Molge, but crawl or wriggle at 
the bottom.” 


SS Se ea ae Se ee ee 


Zao. 1900: 


NGS Rea GAS 


Pah  ZOOLOGIST 


No. 705.—March, 1900. 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORFOLK 
FOR 1899. 


By J. H. Gurney, F.Z.S. 


(AssISTED BY SEVERAL OTHER NatURALISTS.) 
Puate II. 


THE rarities for the year have not been many, and one cannot 
but be impressed with the growing scarcity of the Hobby, Kestrel, 
Magpie, Quail, Woodcock, Ruff, Spotted Crake, Bittern, Teal, 
Garganey, and Wild Duck. 1899 seems to have passed without the © 
record of asingle Waxwing, Black-tailed Godwit, Spotted Crake, 
Eider Duck, Glaucous Gull (last visitation 1895), Great Northern 
Diver, or Fulmar Petrel, and with very few raptorial visitants. 
The Rev. M. C. Bird tells me of one male Hen-Harrier seen in 
November among the Broads, and he saw or heard of an Osprey in 
May; other correspondents record two of these splendid Eagle- 
fishers in October. Hardly any Buzzards came over, and since 
the Buzzard years of 1881 and 1896 they have been conspicuous 
by their absence; it is also a good many years since a Goshawk 
has appeared. 

On Jan. 18th, after a gale in the night, I picked up a Mistle- 
Thrush which had been dashed against the keep of Norwich 
Castle, and a Hawfinch at Kirby Bedon met its death in a some- 
what similar way. Some young Grey-headed Wagtails passed 


about Sept. lst; Crossbills have been reported here and there, 
Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., March, 1900. H 


98 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


and Grey Wagtails as usual. There were no Bluethroats, and 
Snow-Buntings were scarce (H. N. Pashley); but my corre- 
spondent speaks of ‘‘ foreign Blackbirds,”’ and hundreds of small 
dark Thrushes in October, an appearance perhaps more due to the 
locality than the size of the birds themselves. A Black Redstart 
was identified in October, and another in November (Pashley), 
and on Noy. 7th Mr. Ramm feels certain of having seen an 
Ortolan Bunting. Whether this identification can be trusted I 
cannot say, but the wind the day before had changed to the 
north-west. 

The only Lapland Buntings were two in October, but many 
Long-tailed Tits were observed, and in one place they were even 
seen coming off the sea. November was rainy and unsettled up 
to the 11th, but it was too late then to much affect migration, as 
most of the species had passed, though flocks of Little Auks and 
other Alcide were seen at sea. Three or four Grey Shrikes paid 
their customary autumnal visit, and Mr. Arthur Patterson had 
two Quails to announce in that month. 

Although IJ have diligently written down the direction of the 
wind in my journal nearly every day, there was so little autumnal 
migration that no results have been gained. The principal 
movement was during the first week in October, when there were 
so many Grey Plovers ; and at the same time, viz. on the 4th of 
that month, something like a rush was observed in North Lincoln- 
shire by Mr. Caton Haigh (cf. p. 112). 

On Dec. 10th the first snow came with a light west wind, and 
so rapid was the drop that night that the thermometer in my 
parish marked two degrees above zero. A profusion of Ducks, 
Snipe, Water-Rails, Water-hens, &c., immediately appeared on 
the meadows adjacent to the Norwich rivers, and every gunner 
sallied forth bent on destruction. Half-starved Mistle-Thrushes 
flocked to the yew trees in my garden, as many as nine of these 
great birds hanging on or around one small Irish yew; but 
already the red berries (which were in masses a week before) were 
falling off. Barn-Owls, persecuted at all times, suffered more 
than ever, and a good many Kingfishers were siaughtered ; but 
our Norwich birdstuffers have the good sense to refuse to buy 
either the one or the other. On the 12th two guns shot forty 
Snipe in an afternoon at Carrow, and the next day, on the same 


—. 
om 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORFOLK. 99 


ground, made up a bag of ninety-one Snipe, thirty Plover, and 
four Duck. News came to hand of many flocks of Ducks passing 
high overhead in different parts, but especially near the coast, 
beyond the reach of guns. Fowl of all kinds came to Norwich, 
and a basket of Mallard which I saw unpacked contained a nice 
pair of Gadwallt from Lynn, and in another lot two Shovelers t 
from Ranworth. These Gadwall are the first I remember to 
have met with in Norwich Market, while a few days afterwards two 
more were shot near Salthouse, and some Pintails (Ramm). In 
Lubbock’s time Gadwall came to Norwich Market every winter. 
A few fine Goosanders appeared about the 20th (E. Saunders), 
but only two Smews. 

Mr. Arthur Patterson, writing from Yarmouth, and giving a 
description of the hard weather and its effects, says :—‘‘ Dec. 
14th, birds are plentiful; yesterday crowds on Breydon Broad. 
Snipe rushed in after the snow; on the 10th they invaded the 
marshes, and on the 11th began to appear in Yarmouth Market,” 
where the chief salesman, Mr. Durrant, gave Mr. Patterson the 
following particulars from his week-book of birds bought. This 
table could be compared with that given by Mr. Stevenson in 
* The Zoologist’ for 1880, p. 326, which is equally interesting. 


Ba 11 Dec. 12\Dec. 13|Dec. 14'Dec. 15 Dec. 16 
a 47 |-40 | 120 | 43 | 60 | 310 |{22¢k-Snipes 
Beanie... Repes t2 hs cary) a 0 PRS PRA ee 
PIA WING.......0000. 14 6 — 6 eas 20 
Golden Plover ...| 10 i a — 4 a 
ccc csesseeese —_ ili 40 — 6 20 
Mroor-hen ......... — = — — 9 10 
Wvater-Rail......... a se ses — 3 — 
Spotted Crake — — 2 — — — 
EEO. vs. 5.ccccccess — ase = _— 1 if 
(Groosander ......... a sos 25 = — t 
En 4. 4 14 — 30 32, 
ee 5 5 9 4 14 35 
PEAT ..0..002 «+: — 1 — 7 15 
ae a) Rees 2 — 1 3 
Golden-Hye ...... — — — — — 3 
mursed Duck ...... —- = — = — Ki 
MOVCICr ......+0- — 1 — — 3 — 
Woodcock ......... wk. ee 8 — 1 —- 
on rr 2 = a = 1 1 
OC 23 — 40 60 179 336 
PP OCMICK, -..0.5.00- et = scat — — 6 


H 2 


100 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Again, writing on the 16th, Mr. Patterson says :—“ To-day’s © 
[Yarmouth] market reminded me of the old-fashioned times. 
There was scarcely a stall without its odd Lapwing, or its bunch 
of Starlings or Blackbirds. There were scores of Redwings, 
Fieldfares, and Thrushes; one person had a bunch of Sparrows, 
and another of Greenfinches. . . . On one stall, with the Scaup 
I sent you (the “‘white-nosed day-fowl” of our old gunners), were 
ahalf-score Pochards. Last night guns were banging on Breydon 
Broad ali night. Dunlins smothered the flats, am told. One 
old lady had a Shoveler. There were two Long-eared Owls up 
- to-day, two Stock-Doves, and some very juvenile Wood-Pigeons. 
This morning some Coots were swimming about in the lower 
river, and boys were stoning them. Seven [Whooper ?] Swans 
have been seen on Breydon.”’ 

Similar accounts were received from Mr. Dye, who mentions 
that numbers of wildfowl passed over Yarmouth going south, 
and that the cries of Golden Plover were heard at night, as 
is often the case when they are attracted by the street-lamps. 

The rainfall for the year, as taken in my garden, was 24°43, 
the dryest months being June (1°20) and August (37); while the 
wettest, July (3°38), was almost entirely owing to one tremendous 
downpour on July 23rd. In 1898 the rainfall at Keswick was 
23°45, both years being below the average; and our wells, which 
have been quite dry, still want water. 

As it is sometimes convenient to know afterwards what speci- 
mens were examined by the recorder, a dagger (t) in the following 
notes indicate such as were so inspected. 


J ANUARY. 


lst.—A few Golden Plover at the poulterer’s. A Shag t 
allowed itself to be captured while fishing in Blakenny cut, and, 
though exhibiting no apparent injury, did not live many days; it 
had strength, however, to chase and kill some Goldfish in a pond. 
Although in adult winter plumage it already had a few of the 
glossy spring feathers showing in places. Four Shags were 
recorded in last year’s ‘“‘ Notes,’ and they certainly are not the 
rarity in Norfolk they used to be; it would be interesting to 
know to what British colony we are indebted for them, as they 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORFOLK. 101 


no longer breed in Yorkshire, and may perhaps come to us from 
Norway. 

14th.—A young male Iceland Gull on Breydon, so tame that 
Mr. Patterson crept to within ten paces; and of course next day 
it found its way to Mr. Lowne’s shop. Length, 21°5; culmen, 
1°3; tarsus, 1°8. I have not seen it, but these measurements 
are sufficient to establish its identity; and it is the fifth for our 
county, the Glaucous Gull being much commoner. 

18th.— One of the chestnut-coloured Partridges killed at 
Bylaugh, near Dereham, by Col. Custance. These birds are quite 
different in colour from the melanistic race which was met with 
at Campsea Ash in 1891 and 1892, with which they cannot be 
confounded. They are simply an erythrism, an abnormal 
replacement of the natural colour by red, as has occasionally 
happened in the Bullfinch, House-Sparrow, Green Woodpecker, 
Rose-coloured Pastor, &c. This month a variety of the Hooded 
Crow speckled with white was taken near Thetford. 

19th.—Black-throated Diver shot at the mouth of the river 
Bure by Mr. E. C. Saunders, who describes it as largely spotted 
on the wings, and becoming barred with white on its back. 

26th.—A hundred Tufted Ducks and several small lots of 
Gadwall and Wigeon seen on the Ouse near Thetford (T’.. South- 
well). Many Wild Ducks already paired. 

31st.—Thousands of Lapwings at Hickling (S. Harmer). 


FEBRUARY. 


Ist.—A flock of about fifty Siskins by our river searching the 
alders in their usual engaging way. 

2nd.—Mr. Caton Haigh met with seven Shore-Larks at Cley, 
soon after with a flock of about thirty, and farther along the coast 
saw other small parties and single birds; also twenty Chaffinches 
on the shingle, which he presumed had just come over, though 
we do not expect them after Christmas. 

9th.—Coots and Redshanks paired (Bird). 

1l1th.—The weather is now extraordinarily mild for the time 
of year, and the large flights of Wood-Pigeons which were in all 
our woods in January have gone, probably northwards. Lambs 
are becoming general, and the young wheat, which is two inches 
above the ground, is about safe from the depredations of Rooks, 


102 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


which have an appetite for the kernel long after it has sprouted. 
Seed-corn must be drilled very deep to be safe from their long 
beaks, on account of which and other misdeeds very few Norfolk 
farmers give the Rook a good character. Assisted by the Jack- 
daws—an increasing species in the eastern counties—the rascals 
have also, in spite of shooting, been doing their best to let “ the 
weather’ into the farmers’ barley-stacks by persistently pulling 
out great quantities of the top straw and much of the thatch for 
the sake of the grain underneath, which they contrive to do with 
the greatest skill, but more easily where a stack is made up of 
short rakings. Two or three defunct Rooks hoisted on sticks 
make a fairly efficient scarecrow, but occasionally a very hungry 
Rook will not be deterred from making a regular burrow into a 
stack, protruding from which may be seen the black tip of his tail. 
More than this, Rooks will actually attack the roof of a barn, 
which must be pure mischief, as there can be nothing to eat there, 
except it be a few grubs in the thatch. Everyone knows their 
unfortunate partiality for swede-turnips at this time of the year, 
and that in itself is a strong indictment against large Rookeries. 
By pecking holes they soon make the roots rot; and in such 
a winter as 1898-9 this is no joke. But perhaps what most 
annoys the farmer is to see Rooks on a turnip-field when the 
plant is just coming up, for, although in some cases the birds are 
after the wireworm, the result is the same ;—a crop of barren spaces 
appear in the field instead of swedes and mangolds, just as if a 
portion of the field had not been sown at all. Mr. Holmes 
informs me that at Winfarthing, Rooks have for some years 
nested on nut-bushes, where they will not be safe from the 
enraged Norfolk farmer, who seldom has a good word for thes 
sable thieves. | 

14th.—Two Ruffs,t just commencing the spring change, shot 
in a field of young wheat with some Lapwings at Postwick 
(W. Spelman), which occurrence so very early in the year must 
have been due to the open weather. Plovers at this season are 
very fond of young wheat, and there have been a great many on 
the uplands, and in this instance their presence no doubt acted 
as a decoy to the Ruffs. Weather wet, but days very fine in 
spite of it. 

23rd.—A pair of Shoveler Ducks on our largest broad (Bird). 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORFOLK. 103 


The repeated occurrence of Shovelers in the winter has been 
already remarked. Mr. Southwell thinks they are increasing in 
summer, and certainly the number of egg-shells in a nest testify 
to their prolificacy. Of the seven Ducks which commonly breed 
in Norfolk, the Garganey Teal is the only one which is never 
seen in winter; yet Norfolk is far from being its northern 
breeding limit. I have seen as many as nine eggs in a Garganey 
Teal’s nest, and eleven in a Shoveler’s. 

27th.—A very early Thrush’s nest at Keswick with three 
eggs, and another nest with one—undersized eggs in both cases; 
and a Robin’s nest quite ready, in spite of slight frosts every 
night sufficient to brown the wheat. A Wild Duck reported to be 
already sitting at Shottesham, many Siskins in our “Rookery,” 
and a Redpoll apparently searching for a nesting-place; Rooks 
also examining trees, and quantities of Thrushes on the fields. 
Partridges and Wood-Pigeons proved the unprecedented mildness 
of the weather by being paired long ago, although there was snow 
not far away. Five Shovelers at Hickling (Bird); not safe from 
the gunners yet. 

Marcu. 

My correspondent, Mr. Bird, writes from the Broads :—“ An 
old male Golden-Eye still about, four pairs of Bearded Tits 
(good news), one Coot’s nest half-built, and two others com- 
menced ; Water-Rails very noisy ali day.” Four days later came 
the snowstorm which wrought such destruction among the Lap- 
wings in Scotland (Zool. 1899, p. 225). At once all work on my 
farm was stopped, and the wretched Thrushes, some of which 
had only just come northwards, crowded on to the few bits of 
grass still uncovered by the snow. In spite of this the Wheatear 
appeared at Beachamwell on the 22nd (R. C. Nightingale), a day 
later than Mr. Haigh first saw it in Lincolnshire. 

23rd.—Mr. Bird found a Long-eared Owl sitting on five eggs 
among some brakes, which was remarkable after such a downfall 
of sleet and snow, much of which was still on the ground, and 
also from the circumstance of the nest being on the ground, the 
nests of this species which I have seen having always been in a 
tree, the silver-fir by preference. 

28th.—Two Bramblings with biack chins recently taken at 
Yarmouth ; Mr, Lowne, who kept one of them, found that the 


104 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


amount of black diminished in the moult; these black-chinned 
Bramblings are not a very uncommon variety, and are the exact 
reverse of the white-chinned Goldfinch, which is sometimes 
called a ‘“cheverel,” and was described by Madarasz as Carduelis 
albogularis. The black-chinned Brambling does not seem to 
have yet received a name in science. 


APRIL. 


4th.—A pair of Garganey Teal seen (A. Nudd). Now un- 
common anywhere, and practically extinct in West Norfolk. 

8th.—Another pair of Garganey (Bird), evidently going to 
nest, if they had not already begun on a rush-tuft. 

11th.—A Sheldrake seen on Saham Mere, which is twenty- 
four miles from the sea (A. W. Partridge). 

12th.—First Ruff; three Water-Rails’ nests (Bird). 

16th.—Hoopoe at Morston (R. Wood). Two Spoonbills on 
Breydon (B. Dye). 

18th.—A few Gadwall, and one Tufted Duck only at the 
meres on Wretham Heath, where, owing to the drought, there is 
very little water (T. Southwell). 

19th.—First Grasshopper Warblers heard (Bird). 


May. 


_ 8rd.—Mr. Patterson saw an Iceland Gull being mobbed by 
other Gulls at Breydon “Knowle.” Thirteen Whimbrel at 
Hickling; and immediately afterwards two Garganeys (Bird). 

8th.—Six or seven Spoonbills to be seen on Breydon muds, 
where they allowed themselves to be viewed by several people ; 
and again, a few days afterwards, by Mr. Patterson and Mr. Dye, 
with the Iceland [or Glaucous] Gull mentioned above; and nine- 
teen Bar-tailed Godwits. These are the same Spoonbills alluded to 
by Mr. Farman (Zool. 1899, p. 866), and three of them afterwards 
moved on to Cley (Pashley) ; while the Gull moved its quarters to 
Horsey Broad, where it was seen by Mr. Bird. Mr. Patterson has 
already described the manner in which these Spoonbills walked 
(Zool. 1899, p. 270); and, again, it was his opinion that Spoonbills 
are incapable of uttering any sound. I was quite of the same 
opinion until a short time ago, when two Spoonbills in confine- 
ment, which had been dumb for a long time, suddenly, under the 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORFOLK. 105 


influence of a warm day, began a rather feeble duet, accom- 
panied by an up and down movement of the neck, but sufficient 
to prove them not speechless. 

9th.—A Pied Chaffinch at Northrepps. 

10th.—F our Pied Flycatchers in Mr. Pashley’s garden. 

11th.—A Marsh-Harrier’s nest} quite ready for eggs, but not 
containing any, found about two miles from the sea by a naturalist 
who saw the female rise and quit it at twenty yards, there being 
four other Harriers on the wing at the same time, a sight not 
often enjoyed in England nowadays. Unfortunately the two old 
Harriers brought themselves under the gamekeeper’s fatal ban 
' by killing some leverets, and their identity, which had been 
questioned, was only too well established shortly afterwards, as 
this obnoxious individual trapped them both. The cock was 
quite the finest old male that has been seen in Norfolk for many 
a year, with grey wing-coverts, and a light tail and crown. The 
Marsh-Harrier’s nest was nine inches in diameter and raised 
fourteen from the ground, but, as Mr. Bird remarked, as the 
rushes grew the nest would naturally continue to rise a little 
with them. It was composed of pieces of the ‘‘ gladden” which 
grows all round (Carex or Juncus), and a few dead hemlock 
stems from the marsh wall, with one large bramble, and a bit of 
rotten wood the thickness of a man’s finger. <A few yards off lay 
the remains of a small leveret, the fatal appetite for which had 
brought down the keeper’s wrath. The marsh is what would be 
called here a dry marsh, of large extent, a capital place at this 
time of the year for Swallow-tailed Butterflies and Cuckoos, one 
of which birds was seen by the marshman with an egg in its 
mouth or else a young bird. Of this nest Mr. Kearton obtained 
a good photograph, which is excellently reproduced in ‘Our 
Rarer British Breeding Birds.’ It is supposed to be twenty 
years since any Marsh Harriers have been hatched off in 
Norfolk, the last attempt, known to Mr. Bird, prior to this, 
being in 1894, when two eggs are believed to have been laid 
and two Bantam’s eggs substituted for them, on which Mr. 
Bird ascertained the old female Harrier sat. Probably she 
shared the usual fate of all ‘“‘ Hawks” in a game-preserving 
county long before she had time to find out the ruse which was 
practised upon her. Mr. Stevenson considered that the Marsh 


106 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Harrier nested at Ranworth Broad in 1878; and in May, 1881, 
I saw one at Barton, which, from its tameness and the time of 
the year, I supposed might be nesting. The boldness of the 
Tawny Owl when it has young is well known, and one which had 
a nest in an old tree at Buckenham maintained this savage 
character, and frightened so many people that it had to be got 
rid of. First a signalman received a buffet, and lost his hat; then 
the rector of the parish was attacked; after this a man named 
George lost his hat, which was picked up in a field some distance 
away. A young lady was next attacked; and another person had 
to act on the defensive against this formidable aggressor three 
times, the Owl seeming determined to fight him somehow. It is 
extraordinary that the Tawny Owl still holds its own in small 
numbers in this county in spite of the systematic persecution it 
receives. I have lost two of my Teal; but am glad to say the 
Owls remain unmolested. I have never heard of either the 
Short-eared or the Long-eared Owl showing such boldness in 
the defence of their young; but there are few more savage 
birds than the Eagle Owl in confinement at such times; and 
some years ago my man was near losing his eye, since when I 
have had a basket helmet made for him. For a week in the 
early part of May a Nutcracker frequented a plantation of tall 
dark fir trees near Thetford, Mr. Thomas Baring’s attention being 
first drawn by its unusual croaking note; but after a week the 
bird disappeared, and was not seen again, fortunately escaping 
the prowling gunners. The last occurred in 1888; but we have 
never had one in the spring before, and only four altogether ; 
and, for Lincolnshire, Mr. Cordeaux only mentions two. 

12th.—My nevhew saw a Cuckoo fly past him in Northrepps 
Avenue with what he distinctly perceived to be an egg in its 
mouth, and close to where I had seen one searching for a nest 
two days before. It is not often one has an opportunity of 
verifying the habit now so well known. 

18th.—Mr. Pashley saw a Black Redstart. A pair of Common 
Redstarts have built in a tub put up for Owls at a considerable 
height from the ground. 

16th.—A pair of Bearded Tits on the same pond near Holt 
where three were recorded last September, and where the reeds 
have been allowed to grow up, which no doubt attracts them, as 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORFOLK. 107 


they were again seen there in December. ‘Two or three were 
also lately noticed by Mr. Buxton in a small “ bay” on the north 
side of Fritton lake, where it was believed they were extinct (¢f. 
Norwich N. Tr. vi. p. 436). A nest, found by Mr. Bird, on the 
Ist, contained eight eggs on the 6th, a large clutch, six being the 
usual complement. Very few eggs are taken now, there being a 
general desire on all hands to protect this charming bird before 
it is too late. | 

24th.—Four or five Gadwall on Scoulton Mere, evidently 
' nesting; and about one thousand Black-headed Gulls; but no 
Black Terns there this year. One Gadwall was feeding in the 
water, as if she had left ber nest and was hungry; while the 
drake kept guard over his consort until the boat was within 
thirty yards of her. I never identified Gadwall on Scoulton 
Mere before; but the keeper says they have been there all the 
winter; so perhaps these birds’ limited area is spreading. I also 
received some from a small lake at Watton, where they do not 
breed, but regularly appear as visitors. They are tolerably 
common in West Norfolk, probably more than a hundred pair 
of them; and fifteen years ago there were even more, but never 
fifteen hundred on one property as has been said. They have 
never been known to nest on the Broads. 

25th.—Lesser Spotted Woodpecker’s nest, with three eggs, 
at Spixworth; and another nest at Rollesby (Cole); this bird 
probably also bred at Frammingham Lar]. 
 80th.—Lesser Redpoll’s nest at Ingham; about two hun- 
dred nests of the Black-headed Gull at Somerton Broad; and 
a pair of Garganey at Horsey (Bird). An Aylesbury Duck, 
belonging to Mrs. Blythe, has laid an egg measuring eleven and 
a quarter inches in circumference ; a monstrosity indeed ! 


JUNE. 


8rd.—A Little Bittern at Hickling (Bird). 

7th.—Two pairs of Norfolk Plovers,t probably nesting. One 
had a yery yellow bill, and from its general tameness and running 
in front of us, must, we thought, have young; but a careful search 
failed to find them. Mr. Norgate tells me that the Ringed Plover 
will occasionally lay to the eggs of this species; and at Harling 
both are common, proprietors for the most part protecting them, 


108 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


15th.—Grey Plover at Breydon (Patterson); a late bird to be 
still here in June. 

20th.—A Greater Spotted Woodpecker’s nestt in an alder 
tree, containing young ready to fly, and close to a house near 
Keswick. ‘There may also have been a nest at Northrepps, as a 
female, accidentally trapped, had the bare belly spot. 

29th.—A mealy Hedge Sparrow reported seen at Keswick ; 
and a white one at Mousehold. 


JULY. 


2nd.—Six Curlews at Keswick. 

25th.—A very early Greenshank on Breydon muds (Patter- 
son); and about the same time a Golden Plover at Waxham 
(Bird). 

31st.—A fine Demoiselle Crane (Grus virgo), with two primary 
quills severed, shot at Brancaster, by the sea (R. Clarke); but, 
from enquiries made by the Rev. J. Tuck, it is possible that this, 
as well as three others shot at Lavenham, in Suffolk, had been 
turned out by the Duke of Bedford’s orders at Woburn Park. 
Another, with a portion of the carpal joint cut away, was sent to 
Mr. Cole, of Norwich, on October 6th; and altogether twenty 
are reported to have got away from Woburn in spite of several 
being pinioned to the first joint. 


AUGUST. 


2nd.—Two Wood-Sandpipers at Hickling (Bird), a species 
which generally comes—true to date—-at the beginning of harvest; 
but no Garganeys, though looked for; though Mr. Bird hears 
that a keeper has some young ones hatched from gathered eggs. 

9th.— Five Wood-Sandpipers seen in a marsh at Cley (F. D. 
Power); also a small Wader, which the authorities there, who 
are now very clever in detecting novelties, considered to be a 
Broad-billed Sandpiper (Pashley). 

18th.—Two Corncrakes, flushed by my nephew in a barley 
field, did a very unusual thing in immediately perching on some 
elm-trees. Later in the autumn two were “telegraphed” at 
Keswick; and I heard of two caught by hand elsewhere. Mr. 
Bird remarks that it has been quite a Landrail year, in confirma- 
tion of which he sends me dates of seventeen shot or seen by 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORFOLK. 109 
himself between August 25th and October 10th, adding that he 
had heard of many others; and several were seen at Northrepps 
about that time. 

29th.—_ W. A Green Woodpecker seen on the sea-wall at Cley 
by Mr. F. D. Power, not the first indication we have of this 
being an over-sea migrant; for, as Mr. Pashley reminds me, they 
are often seen on the brackish marshes, and he has himself 
flushed them from the creeks by the beach. Mr. Bird remarks 
that if Green Woodpeckers do not migrate they move about 
much more in Norfolk in autumn and winter than in spring and 
summer; and between September 2nd and November 29th he 
saw nine, all within four miles of the coast, and in places where 
they certainly do not breed. They are, however, like the Lesser 
Spotted Woodpecker, very susceptible to frost, which means 
starvation for them. At the beginning of the year Mr. Lowne 
had a Green Woodpecker with a beak like a Crossbill, and not only 
was it crossed, but the longest mandible had attained the length 
of two and a half inches, ana it is extraordinary how it maintained 
its existence. 

31lst.—S.8.W. Five Great Skuas seen on the coast by Mr. 
Long; and one of them, again, a few days afterwards, by Mr. 
Gunn. October is the usual month in which this fine Skua has 
visited Norfolk, and only one has been seen before in August. 
Mr. Connop has a splendid melanism of this species, quite 
equal to the one figured in Dresser’s ‘ Birds of Europe.’ 


SEPTEMBER. 


Wind west, thirteen days; wind north, twelve days; wind 
south, two days; wind east, two days. 

A4Ath.—W., light. A hybridt between a Goldfinch and a 
' Linnet, netted at Acle by a birdcatcher named George, has the 
wings of a Goldfinch, but the Linnet’s plumage predominates in 
the breast, back, throat, and tail, and its note partakes of both 
(W. Lowne). It is a hybrid which has been several times bred in 
confinement, but the present one we are assured is a wild caught 
bird, and agrees fairly with the description in Macpherson’s 
“Hybrid Finches” (Norw. N. Tr. iv. p. 368). 

Sth.—N.W., first frost. An immature Icterine Warbler + 
(Hypolais ictertna)—the fourth that has been taken in Norfolk— 


110 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


shot on our coast by Mr. E. C. Arnold (Zool., 1899, p. 475), is 
exactly similar in size and tint to one shot in 1896 by Mr. Robert 
Gurney, and presented to the museum. Mr. Cordeaux, in his 
List, is only able to give one Lincolnshire occurrence of this 
species, and two of the Great Reed Warbler, which Mr. Howard 
Saunders thinks may be also added to the Norfolk list (Manual 
Bub, Ist ed.). 

6th.—W.S.W. A Manx Shearwater picked up at St. Faith’s, 
a species which always turns up at this time of the year, either 
off the coast or inland. 

7th.—E. A young female Wheatear, shot by Mr. F. E. Gunn 
on the coast, has the central rectrices black to the base, and the 
other rectrices also much smudged with black, and some speckling 
of the same on the belly; at first thought to be an Isabelline 
Wheatear, but it seems rather to be a slightly melanistic 
Saxicola cenanthe. 

8th—W. A beautiful young male Buff-breasted Sandpiper 
(Tryngites rufescens), shot on shingle at Cley by Mr. Arnold. Its 
nicely mottled upper parts are very different from the dark back 
of our old Museum specimen, said to have been shot in July, a 
few miles east of where the present one was procured. ‘The 
species has a more rounded head than most of its kin, which 
feature was well shown in Mr. Arnold’s freshly mounted example, 
and also the distinctive freckles under the wing. Mr. Cordeaux 
does not include this American species in his List, but it has 
been shot five times in Norfolk. Whether the present example 
came with a west, or an east wind, seems doubtful. 

9th.—N.W. ‘Two Velvet Scoters seen, several Richardson’s 
Skuas; also Great Crested Grebes, young Ruffs, two Dusky 
Redshanks, and a Red-necked Phalarope,—all on the coast 
(Pashley). 

14th.—N.E. Great Snipe at Southwold (‘ The Field’). Be- 
tween this date and the 27th Great Snipes were shot at Yar- 
mouth (Dye), Haddiscoe, Pensthorpe (Davey), and two at Elling- 
ham (Toyser) ; while later on at Stuston (Southwell), and two at 
Morston (Pashley). It is many years since Norfolk has had any 
number of Solitary Snipe, though there were several in Septem- 
ber, 1880. 

18th.—N.W. Hoopoe at Skeyton (Cole). 

21st.—N.W. Four Cormorants at Hunstanton (Tuck). 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORFOLK. 111 
29th.—Another of the chestnut Partridges,} an adult of a dark 
Grouse-like colour, killed at Elsing (T. E. Gunn), which is near 
where the others have all been taken, and where a race has really 
been perpetuated, this being the fourth year in which they have 
turned up, and the present the twelfth example. It would be 
interesting to see what a young one, about half-grown, would be 
like, as no doubt the dark plumage would show. As so much has 
been said in these “‘ Notes”’ about this singular variety, the accom- 
panying reproduction of a sketch by Mr. Herd may be acceptable 
(Plate II.), representing one of our best specimens (killed last 
November), a typical Perdix montana, Briss.; and very like 
Brisson’s plate, with just the same light head and neck. Even 
in his time it was known to cross with. the Common Partridge, 
from which the French ornithologists supposed it to be distinct. 
30th.—S. The bushes by the sea full of small birds, in- 
cluding a Nightingale and some Pied Flycatchers, the wind, 
_ which had been westerly, having suddenly veered round to S.E. 
(Pashley). A good many Sky-Larks were found dead under the 
telephone-wires at Cley (Pashley), and a Dunlin was shot in a 
turnip-field at Trimmingham (Buxton); but this was before the 
movement noticed by Mr. Haigh in Lincolnshire. 


OcToBER. 

Wind west, ten days; south, eight days; north, six days; 
east, four days. 

lst.—S. veering to S8.S.H. Hundreds of Long-tailed Tits 
seen in St. George’s Park, Yarmouth, by Mr. Patterson; but the 
true Acredula caudata was not detected among them, though, 
according to the late Mr. Churchill Babington, it has been met 
with in Norfolk. It seems to have been a great Tit year, as Mr. 
Bligh counted twenty-seven Long-tailed Tits in one flock in 
August, and I noticed several. Mr. Caton Haigh reports that it 
is many autumns since he noticed so many Great and Blue Tits 
in Lincolnshire. 1882 was also a Tit year in Norfolk, and in 
October, 1880, there were troops of them near Cromer—distin- 
guishable by the white on the head being restricted to the crown— 
which had presumably crossed the sea. Great Tits have been 
taken at Norfolk light-vessels several times, but the Long-tailed 
Tit only once. About this time four Grey Phalaropes were 


112 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


announced in different places (Lowne and Clark), and an Eagle, 
doubtless a young White-tailed Eagle, was shot at Babingley, 
near Lynn. This is the seventh Eagle in the last twelve years, 
the others occurring in November or December. 

Qnd.—S.W. Thirty-three Grey Plovers on Mr. Durrant’s 
stall in Yarmouth Market (the dealer alluded to in the preface), ° 
and three Greenshanks (Patterson). : 

12th.—S.S.W. One hundred and twenty Grey Plovers offered 
by different Breydon gunners to Mr. Durrant, the salesman, who 
says that during the ten days the migration lasted he had about 
two hundred and seventy altogether (Patterson). The wind had 
been west or some point of west every day except on the 6th, 8th, 
and 9th, and in the face of a west wind they came, which was very 
strong on the 3rd, when perhaps most of them touched shore. A 
good many came to Cley and Blakenny (Pashley), and Mr. Haigh 
fell in with them as far north as Lincolnshire. This year has 
produced a greater number of Grey Plovers than has occurred 
since the autumn of 1877; but they are at all times rather a 
common Norfolk bird, and I have always considered them essen- 
tially a bird of the coast, and at Blakenny much more abundant 
than the Golden Plover. 

16th.—S8S.H., strong. Mr. Bird, who lives near the coast, 
put up three Snipe in a dry turnip-field, and at the same time 
remarked Rooks, Grey Crows, and Jackdaws streaming overhead ; 
while flocks of Grey Crows were to be seen passing Fritton Lake, 
indicating that the movement had an extended front. I saw a 
Ring-Ouzel, and “very many Ring-Ouzels”’ turned up at Cley 
(Pashley). Four days after that, flock after flock of Long-tailed 
Tits arrived, and I am assured by Mr. Pashley, whose “ garden 
was full of them,” that they were actually seen coming off 
the sea (cf. note on Oct. Ist). 

25th.—N.N.W. Mr. Lowne received an immature female 
Purple Heron from Blyth, near Lowestoft, where it was shot by 
Mr. Roberts, as notified in the ‘ Field,’ and may possibly have 
been the bird which was seen at Easton Broad on the 18th, and 
thought to be a Glossy Ibis (‘Field,’ Oct. 28th). The last 
occurrence was in 1882, and, like nearly ali the others, an imma- 
ture example. The wind on the 24th was N.N.E.; Grey Crows 
going N.W. On the 23rd and 22nd there was practically no wind. 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORFOLK. 118 


NoOvEMBER. 


8th.—S. A gamekeeper named Platten, about six o’clock in 
the evening, shot a large bird which he noticed pass twice under 
the arch of Rollesby Bridge, where there is a small stream about 
four inches deep. When taken to Mr. Connop it proved to be an 
adult Night-Heron ¢ without any occipital plumes, and in some- 
what rusty plumage, and was no doubt after fish. It is supposed 
to have been some days on the broad when shot. Curiously 
enough, Nov. 8th is exactly the same day on which one was shot 
at Caister in 1860. It is twelve years since there has been a 
capture of the Night Heron, the two seen at Beeston being 
doubtful; and the last two were shot respectively on the sail of a 
mill and the roof of a house. 

1ith.—A Shag caught on the beach (Patterson), but it may 
have been shot at. 

15th.— Two Egyptian Geese shot at Morston (Pashley), 
almost the only Geese killed this winter, except two Pink-footed, 
which were winged (Pashley), of which one got well and escaped ; 
but the other is in a garden where there are some Bean Geese, 
with which it will possibly pair. 

17th.—Mr. Pashley writes that flocks of Little Auks were 
seen passing at sea, and that two of them came near enough to 
strike the rigging of a steamer which a short time before had 
come ashore. No more that I know of were captured ; and, as I 
was away, I did not note the direction of the wind, but it was 
immediately after the great meteoric shower. Two were also 
picked up in October. 


DECEMBER. 


8th.—Received from Saham a drake Shovelert beginning to 
assume plumage, caught there on the 6th, and a few days after- 
wards one was taken at Yarmouth (Patterson). 

9th.—Received a Storm Petrel} from Winterton Lighthouse, 
which, I believe, was found on the shore with three Gannets and 
some Kittiwake Gulls (Patterson). 

2lst.—Three Barnacle-Geese shot out of a flock of ten at 
Breydon (Patterson), and about the same time three at Morston 
and two at Cley (Pashley), where altogether fifteen were seen. 
The last I remember in that district was a single bird shot from 

Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., March, 1900. I 


114 THE ZO0O0OLOGIST. 


the shore in October, 1890, and so many as fifteen is quite 
unusual on any part of the east coast. 


AVICULTURAL NOTES. 


Black-tailed Godwit.— Two pairs of Black-tailed Godwits 
from Leadenhall Market, turned into an open-air cage in May, 
soon became tame enough to be amusing, and, being pinioned, 
were allowed their run every day. No matter how dry the grass 
was these Godwits were continually boring for worms, but it is 
difficult to see when they get anything, the action of swallowing 
is so quick. They frequently stood on one leg, sometimes 
scratching themselves with the other ; sometimes motionless, and 
in that attitude appeared to sleep. ‘They did not care for water 
so long as they had sopped bread and finely chopped meat, which 
they eat voraciously. Very vociferous over this food, it was most 
comical to see them sparring like Ruffs, seizing one another by 
the beak, and screaming with rage if one was thought to get more 
than its share, which the females generally did. But the prettiest 
action (when I longed to photograph them) was when, with spread 
tail, lowered head, and scapular feathers raised, and the beak used 
as a weapon, they menaced one another; but no harm ever came 
of it. One lived eight months, but the cold was too much, and 
they are evidently not such hardy cage-birds as the Knots, which 
stand frost well. After three months’ diligent boring they con- 
cluded there were no more worms in my enclosed garden, and 
gave up boring, and never tried again, thus showing an amount of 
instinct very near to reason. 

Common Crossbill.—T he following are a few experiences with 
caged Crossbills, which, unlike the shy Hawfinch, feed fearlessly 
in the presence of anybody, and are consequently amusing to 
keep and easy to watch. Restless and Parrot-like in action, they 
climb about the wires of a large cage, never tired of testing its 
strength and durability with their strong jaws. Cones are their 
natural food, and they most dexterously push aside the scales by 
a sideways lever-like motion of the mandibles in order to get at 
the seed beneath, first bringing the points of the upper and lower 
mandibles from their crossed position to be almost over each 
other, an action which requires to be seen to be duly appreciated. 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM NORFOLK. 115 


In this way they prise off the scales, but unless there be a seed 
they know too well to do it in useless search. It may be pre- 
sumed that they would generally push the scales of a cone to the 
right or the left, according to the way their mandibles cross one 
another. In fifteen recently examined the upper mandible turned 
to the right, and in eight to the left. In one I had alive the 
mandibles grew to the unnatural length of an inch. My Cross- 
bills never manifested any interest in old brown fir-cones, but 
they liked the new ones in September, and were very fond of the 
big cones of Picea nobilis. We read of great destruction caused 
by them to apple crops, but they do not seem able to work their 
way into an apple which is not on a bough, though they relish it 
if cut into small pieces, evidently liking the fruit part quite as 
much as the pips. Their power of sudden concealment in the 
tops of the fir trees, remarkable at first sight, is entirely due to 
their instinct in remaining quite still. A Crossbill can fly with a 
fir-cone in its mouth, which is one proof of the strength of those 
powerful mandibles, if, indeed, proof were wanted. My Crossbills 
favoured me with no music until Christmas Day, when for the 
first time one of them was heard to utter a loud chirp. When 
bought on July 6th they were in red male plumage ; by Christmas 
Day one of them had become quite yellow, but the other two cocks 
had changed but little, though the brightness of their red had 
diminished since October. Bechstein says many are bred in 
aviaries in Thuringia, but never acquire the red colour in con- 
finement. 


Erratum in Notes for 1898.—I learn from Mr. Howard Bunn 
that the correct date when the Little Bustard was shot at Kessing- 
land, as recorded in last year’s ‘“‘ Notes,’ was not May 30th, but 
May 3rd, 1898, an error on my part. 


#2 


116 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


BIOLOGICAL SUGGESTIONS. 
MIMICRY. 


By W. L. Distant. 


(Concluded from vol. iii. p. 553.) 


AcTIVE MIMICRY naturally predicates intelligence, and is not 
equivalent to what is generally described as instinct,* so univer- 
sally applied to any other animal than man. Prof. Lloyd Morgan 
remarks on the many who believe that instinct is neither more 
nor less than inherited habit, but concludes that, ‘‘ while still 
believing that there is some connection between habit and 
instinct, admit that the connection is indirect and permissive 
rather than direct and transmissive.” + Every attempt is made 
to minimise this faculty. In birds, Mr. Orr has warned us not 
to overrate the intelligence implied by nest-building ‘“‘of an 
animal which has not sufficient intelligence to loosen a slip-knot 
tied around its leg.” { But man himself has very slowly and 
laboriously acquired—and has not yet altogether the desire to 
possess—the intelligence to loosen the artificial slip-knots that 
bind him to many errors and much superstition. If, however, 
some would minimise animal intelligence, there are others who 
maintain the purposive acts of plants. Thus Mr. Grant Allen, 
in describing the wonderful life-history of the common gorse, and 
allowing that “the intelligence is here no doubt unconscious 
and inherited,” still remarks: ‘‘ Gorse, in short, may fairly be 
called a clever and successful plant, just as the Bee may be 
called a clever and successful insect, because it works out its 
own way through life with such conspicuous wisdom.’§ The 


* The true teleological definition of the term was defined by Paley: 
‘An instinct is a propensity, prior to experience, and independent of in- 
struction” (‘ Natural Theology’). 

} ‘Habit and Instinct,’ p. $22. 

{ ‘A Theory of Development and Heredity,’ p. 19. 

§ ‘Flashlights on Nature,’ pp. 282-8. 


MIMICRY.— 117 


same spirit runs throughout Dr. J. E. Taylor’s ‘Sagacity and 
Morality of Plants.’ 

Animal intelligence has been opposed by two great factors— 
the philosophy of Descartes * and theological dogma. The first 


* In discussing a philosophy like that of Descartes one must not trust 
alone to his own impressions and reading of the philosopher, or a critic may 
soon be found to prove that either he has not such an intimate acquaintance 
with the language in which it was written as to prevent misunderstanding, 
or that his mind is not sufficiently attuned to escape misconception. I will 
thercfore quote some authorities to whom these objections do not, or should 
not, apply. According to Dr. Martineau, Descartes taught that ‘the soul, 
4. é. the thinking principle, though united with the whole body, exercises its 
chief functions in the brain.” ‘* But the soul he pronounced to be exclusively 
human, and, in the human being, a substance entirely distinct from the 
body.” Hence animals are automata. ‘All the things that you make 
Dogs or Horses or Monkeys do are only movements of their fear, their hope, 
or their joy, which can be made without any thought” (‘Types of Ethical 
Theory,’ 2rd edit. vol. i. pp. 141, 144, 145).— Prof. Mahaffy, describing 
Descartes’ opinion on the point, and in respect to the supposition that other 
animals, from the likeness of their organs to ours, may have some thought, 
though less perfect than our own, makes him, in rejoinder, to say :—‘“‘ T’'o 
this I have nothing to reply, except that, if they thought as we do, they 
must have an immortal soul, which is not likely, as we have no reason to 
extend it to some animals without extending it to all, such as Worms, 
Oysters, Sponges, &c.’’ Thus, as Prof. Mahaffy further remarks :—‘‘ The 
difficulty which the opponents of Descartes felt most strongly was the possible 
extension of souls to Oysters and Worms. Thus theological questions deter- 
mined the questions on both sides” (‘ Descartes,’ pp. 180 and 182). It isa 
relief to turn to Renan, who describes Francis of Assisi as ‘‘ far removed 
_ from the brutality of the false spiritualism of the Cartesians; he only acknow- 
ledged one sort of life; he recognized degrees in the scale of being, but no 
sudden interruption; like the sages of India, he could not admit that false 
classification which places man on one side, and, on the other, those 
thousand forms of life of which we only see the outside, and in which, 
_ though our eyes detect only uniformity, there may lie infinite diversity. For 
Francis, nature had but one voice”’ (‘ Studies in Religious History,’ p. 318). 

Even Weismann may be considered no supporter of the view of animal 
intelligence, judging from the following remarks :—“ It is usually considered 
that the origin and variation of instincts are also dependent upon the exercise 
of certain groups of muscles and nerves during a single life-time, and that 
the gradual improvement which is thus caused by practice is accumulated by 
hereditary transmission. I believe that this is an entirely erroneous view, 
and I hold that all instinct is entirely due to the operation of natural selection, 
and has its foundation, not upon inherited experiences, but upon the varia- 
tions of the germ” (‘Lectures on Heredity,’ &c., Eng. transl., 2nd edit, 
yol. i. p. 92), 


Hee THE ZOOLOGIST. 


is clearly intelligible and ably stated; the second is more of an 
implication, but both are based on the belief of man’s special 
immortality ; and, although divines are found* who are willing to 
extend the promise of a future life to the whole animal kingdom, 
and have discovered texts to advocate that view, the Hebrew 
Scriptures can scarcely be said to strongly support it. Even the 
poor untutored Todas of India, who are alone valued as an 
ethnological study, have at least a kinder and more sympathetic 
heart for their cattle. The sum of their belief is, that they were 
born—they and their cattle somehow rose out of the earth. 
When they die they go to Amnér (the next world), which is a 
world exactly like this, whither their Buffaloes join them, to 
supply milk as in this state.t Sir Herbert Maxwell, in discussing 
our obligations to wild animals, states, as a “‘remarkable and 
perplexing fact, that neither the chosen people nor Christians are 
bound by their religion to pay the slightest regard to the feelings 
of animals. . . . There is not a word about mercy towards dumb 
animals in the Sermon on the Mount; not a word in all the 
writings of the Fathers (so far as known to me); not a word, 
apparently, from all the teachers of Christianity until we reach 
the dawn of rationalism in the eighteenth century, when an 
English country clergyman—the Rev. Mr. Grainger—scandalized 
his congregation and jeopardized his reputation for orthodoxy by 
preaching the duty of humane treatment of beasts and birds.” { 
But if evolution is not a farce, and man has been derived from 
more lowly ancestors, then the possession of a soul—using the 


* Bishop Butler urges that every argument by which we maintain the 
immortality of man is of equal validity to maintain the immortality of the 
lower animals ’’ (Canon Wilberforce). 

+ W. E. Marshall, ‘A Phrenologist among the Todas,’ p. 125. —Itis a 
long flight from a Toda to an Agassiz, but we may quote the opinion of that 
eminent and not undevout zoologist :—‘‘ Most of the arguments of philosophy 
in favour of the immortality of man apply equally to the permanency of 
this principle in other living beings. May I not add that a future life in 
which man would be deprived of thaf great source of enjoyment and intel- 
lectual and moral improvement which result from the contemplation of the 
harmonies of the organic world would involve a lamentable loss; and may 
we not look to a spiritual concert of the combined worlds and all their 
inhabitants in presence of their Creator as the highest conception of para- 
dise ?”’ (‘An Essay on Classification,’ p. 99). 

} ‘ Blackwood’s Magazine,’ August, 1899, p. 228, 


MIMICRY. 119 


term in the ordinary signification as taught to ordinary people— 
must imply either its existence in the whole animal world, or its 
gradual evolution* with the specialization of type, both of which 
premises are outside scientific reasoning, and therefore quite beyond 
the cognizance of plain folk. ‘To deny conscious intelligence is 
a corollary to denying immortality to animals, and it is often 
the desire to monopolise the last that so frequently ensures the 
denial of the first.t The writer of ‘ Kcclesiastes’ had nursed the 
thought—‘“‘ Who knoweth the spirit of man whether it goeth 
upward, and the spirit of the beast whether it goeth downward to 
the earth.” 

That animal intelligence is saepied to prove much mimicry 
of an active and not of a merely passive character, is abundantly 
advocated by facts. That an insect or bird should seek and 
obtain concealment by its own volition, and by a sense of adap- 
tation in bringing into juxtaposition its own peculiarly-coloured 
body with some material object with which it closely assimilates, 
is an exemplification of intellect, though inferior to that shown 
in the general psychology of Bees, Wasps, and Ants. In Birds 
it would rank lower than the acquired and more complicated 
knowledge of the African Honey-bird, which is able to associate 
the appearance of Man with that of a honey-seeking creature, and 
to lure and lead him to the nest of the Bee, in order that his 
assistance and strength may wreck the nest and leave the bird 


* 6¢T believe that the spirit of man was developed out of the anima or 
conscious principle of animals, and that this, again, was developed out of the 
lower forms of life-force, and that this in its turn out of the chemical and 
physical forces of nature; and that at a certain stage in this gradual 
development, viz. with man, it acquired the property of immortality pre- 
cisely as 1 now, in the individual history of each man at a certain stage, 
acquires the capacity of abstract thought” (Josh. Le Conte, ‘ Evolution and 
its Relation to Religious Thought,’ p. 295). 

+ The Hon. L. A. Tollemache has contributed some original remarks on 
this subject :—‘‘ I sometimes think that the lower animals bear the same sort 
of relation to man that the Apocrypha bears to the Bible. Theologians are 
apt to regard the human soul and the Bible as having a right (so to speak), 
each in its own way, to say ‘Noli me tangere’ to science. The lower 
animals and (though in a very different manner) the Apocrypha bar such 
exorbitant claims. They serve as intermediate links, and thus tend to 
evolutionize Religion. In other words, the lower animals are half-human, 
just as the Apocrypha is half-Biblical”’ (‘ Benjamin Jowett,’ p. 37, note), 


120 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


what it requires in the débris that remains after the auxiliary’s 
wants are satisfied. ‘‘A Green Frog will with predilection rest 
on green leaves. The advantages of concealment are obvious, 
and in this case he ‘adapts himself’ to the surroundings by 
making for green localities; if he did not he would be eaten up — 
sooner than his more circumspect comrades. But this making 
for, and sitting in, the green has has not necessarily made him of 
that colour.’ * As Dr. Reid forcibly enquires, ‘‘ By what term 
shall we designate the action of the Spider when he builds his 
web? Does the animal not know for what purpose he constructs 
it? Was there ever a web-building in which there. were not 
circumstances novel alike to the experience of the individual and 
to that of the species? Or, when he runs along a thread to 
capture his prey, or cuts loose a dangerous captive, does he not 
consciously adapt means to ends, just as much as a man who runs 
to secure a snared bird, or who builds a ‘ golden bridge’ for a flying 
enemy?” + What angler does not know the greater difficulty in 
filling a basket from a stream much fished, than from one little 
visited by anglers, and how the greater skill required is not an 
incident of fewer fish, but of the greater caution acquired by the 
same? The Marquess of Granby truly observes: ‘‘ Of course, at the 
date when Canon Kingsley went a-fishing, Trout were easy to catch 
compared with what they are now, at any rate in the best known 
English rivers.” .... “ Trout, being very much fished over,” in 
many cases from over-weed-cutting, &c., ‘‘ are highly educated and 
more difficult to kill than ever they were before.” { <A recent 
writer has illustrated this fact. Mr. Basil Field, describing his 
experience in fly-fishing, states :—‘‘ If a fly be cast in one of Mr. 
Andrew’s stock-ponds at Guildford, there is a rush and fight for 
it among all the Trout within whose range of vision it falls. If 
it be cast again a few minutes after a Trout has been caught and 
returned to the water, two or three fish only will compete for it. 
Repeat the process, and perhaps one may come, slowly, shyly, and 
in a half-hearted manner. But when several have been taken and 
returned—although the pond is large and crowded with fish— 
cast the fly where you will, the Trout are shy, suspicious, and 


* Haeckel and Gadow, ‘The Last Link,’ pp. 125-6, 
} ‘The Present Evolution of Man,’ p. 188. 
} ‘The Trout’ (Fur, Feather, and Fin Series), pp. 87-8, 


MIMICRY. 121 


hard to catch.” * Prof. McIntosh, with reference to the absence 
of the cortex of the brain in fishes, observes, ‘‘ Who has proved 
that the function of memory depends on the brain-cortex of the 
human subject ? I have seen many a curious case in the patho- 
logical room, the history of which would not have have led us to 
this conclusion.” + According to Livingstone, the Hippopotamuses 
in the rivers of Londa, where they are much in danger of being 
shot, gain wit by experience; for while those in the Zambesi put 
up their heads openly to blow, those referred to keep their noses 
among water-plants, and breathe so quietly that one would not 
dream of their existence in the river, except by footprints on the 
banks.” t In the Leeba, Crocodiles possess more of the fear of 
man than in the Leeambye. The Balonda have taught them by 
their poisoned arrows to keep out of sight. ‘‘ We did not see one 
basking inthe sun.’ § Nansen remarks :—“ Curiously enough, one 
can, as arule, get nearer to the Seal with the larger vessel than with 
the boats. They have learned to fear the latter, and often take 
to the water quite out of range, while one can sometimes bring the 
ship right up to the floe on which they lie before they decamp.’’ || 
On the solitary St. Paul’s Rocks, situated between the equatorial 
coasts of Africa and South America, Sir C. Wyville Thomson, 
at the visit of the ‘ Challenger,’ writes: ‘‘In the morning both 
the Booby and the Noddy were quite tame, but towards afternoon 
even these few hours’ contact with humanity had rendered them 
more wary, and it was now no longer possible to knock them 
down with sticks or stones.” {1 Semon had a similar experience 
in Queensland. ‘‘ On removing my camp to new hunting-grounds, 

* ‘Fortnightly Review,’ April, 1894.—A curious instance of intelligence 
in fish is given by Frank Buckland. He was told, on good authority, that 
the Salmon in the Seame always jump at the weir at 11 o’clock on Sunday 
morning when they hear the church bells ring. Of course that is not the 
cause of their activity, ‘‘but it so happens that on Sunday morning, the mills 
being shut down, the water comes down over the weirs in greater abundance 
than on any other day of the week; the Salmon find this out, and, like wise 
fish, make the best of their time in endeavouring to get over the weir” 
(‘ Life of Frank Buckland,’ by Bompas, 2nd edit., pp. 156-7). 

+ ‘Journ. Mental Science,’ April, 1898. 

t ‘Mission. Travels and Researches in S. Africa,’ p. 242. 

§ Ibid. p. 273. 

|| ‘ First Crossing of Greenland,’ Eng. transl., new edit., p. 85. 

{I ‘ Voyage of the Challenger.’—The Atlantic, vol. 11. p. 108, 


: 


122 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


I used to have no difficulty during the first days in stealing up 
to the water-birds so as to get within shooting range. In an 
incredibly short time, however, they became shy, and then they b 4 
were by no means inferior to their European relations in a 
prudence and caution.” * Sir Joseph Banks, when in New South 
Wales with Capt. Cook, found most of the birds “extremely — 
shy, so that it was with difficulty that we shot any of them.”T 
The few travellers who have had the great good fortune to — 
visit a little known and unfrequented island have told us what 
small fear other animals have for their colleague Man, till they — 
have experienced his destructive propensities, and then how 
quickly reserve, shyness, caution, and fear rapidly become domi- 
nant factors in a hitherto peaceful existence. is: 

Of course there are exceptions to this rule, especially among 
birds. According to Mr. Macpherson, the tameness of the 
Ortolan Bunting as observed by him in Spain “is almost 
ludicrous. So little do they apprehend injury, that they will 
allow visitors to lie on the grass while they forage round for 
earthworms.” | The writer's own experience in the Transvaal 
is precisely similar with respect to the Pied Babbling-Thrush 
(Crateropus bicolor). If I lay down at the edge of bush and 
kept quiet, these birds would not only come close to me, but 
remain there. Again, Curlews and Golden Pheasants are wild 
in whatever part of the world they are found, even where the 
report of a gun has never been heard.§ According to Dr. Leith 
Adams, in Canada “‘ the Purple Swallow has now such a predilec- 
tion for man’s society, on account of the preponderance of insect 
life which invariably surrounds him wherever he goes, that he has 
only to construct a small cot with several chambers, and place it 
on a pole at the door of any solitary shanty in the wild wilderness, 
when year after year, with the certainty of the seasons, it will be 
tenanted by these birds in preference to any other situation.” || 
The sound of firearms does not at first universally create terror in 
birds. D’Albertis relates that, when “fishing with dynamite,” 


* Tn the Australian Bush,’ p. 58. 

} ‘Journal,’ edited by Sir J. Hooker, p. 302. 

{ ‘ Roy. Nat. Hist.’ vol. iii. p. 414. 

§ Sir S. Baker, ‘ Wild Beasts and their Ways,’ vol. i. p. 180. 
|| ‘Field and Forest Rambles,’ p. 150. 


MIMICRY. 123 


“an Haliastur sphenurus, with its female, and a young one 
already able to fly, were perched on the branch of a tree, 
interested at this novel method of fishing, and not in the least 
alarmed by the detonation. When I had finished, the male and 
female picked up the little fishes which I left, and took them to 
their young one.”* Himer, when staying in the Dutch island of 
Rottum, in West Friesland, found the Water-Rail (Rallus aquati- 
cus), ‘which is usually so shy, ran about close to me in the 
ditches so fearlessly that I could almost have caught it with my 
hands. ‘This island is let by the Dutch Government to an egg- 
bailiff, whose duty consists in collecting birds’ eggs, and therefore 
no bird is allowed to be hunted there; it is especially forbidden 
to shoot at them.” + 
On the other hand, wild animals have chosen to seek the pro- 

tection of man when pursued by their enemies. The African 
traveller Anderson once had a Blesbok take refuge at his 
camp-fire when pursued by Wild Dogs. He also states :—‘I 
have known small birds fly to my waggon and into it, on 
several occasions, when pursued by Hawks.’ { Andrew Steed- 
man once witnessed a herd of Gnus pursued by a Lion. 
“The affrighted animals seemed to seek the vicinity of our 
waggon as a protection from their formidable enemy.”’§ A 
lady, describing a great grass and forest fire which took place 
in South Africa in February, 1869, writes: ‘‘ The poor Hares 
and Wild Bucks came to the houses for protection from the 
flames.” || Another narrator elsewhere states: ‘“‘ Wild Bucks 
from the surrounding bush came and crouched about, terror- 
stricken, and one, half scorched to death, took refuge on the 
stoop of the building.’ Col. Ward, describing the ‘ hawking” 
of Jackdaws in the Peshawur Valley, says that a Jackdaw, when 
closely pressed, ‘‘ would make straight for the nearest human 
beings he saw, fly round the men, under the horses’ girths, into 
a dog-cart or buggy, if there was one, and do his utmost to dodge 
his pursuer, often causing a regular stampede among the horses, 

* ‘New Guinea,’ vol. ii. p. 329. 

+ ‘Organic Evolution,’ Engl. transl. p. 227. 

| ‘Twenty-five Years in a Waggon,’ pp. 88-9. 

§ ‘ Wanderings and Adventures in Int. S. Africa,’ vol. i. p. 154. 


|| Quoted by J. Croumbie Brown, ‘ Hydrology of 8. Africa,’ p. 184. 
{{ Ibid. p. 186, 


124 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


for they could not at all understand the two birds flying about 
among them in this way.”’* According to the Comte de 
Canteleu, Stags nearly always make for the abodes of men when 
they are sinking. tT 

On the other hand, ‘‘the Cattle-Heron (Ardea russata), in 
Egypt, when fleeing before the sportsman, shelters itself under 
the Oxen and Buffaloes, because it knows that it is there 
protected from his gun.” { Bonitos and Albicores may be often 
observed to congregate about the stern of a ship to escape the 
attacks of Sword-fish.§ 

Audubon relates that in the Missouri region of North 
America, while a number of Indian chiefs were conferring with, 
and angrily talking to, Mr. Chardon, “he sitting with his 
arms on a table between them, a Dove, being pursued by a 
Hawk, flew in through the open door, and sat panting and worn 
out on Mr. Chardon’s arm for more than a minute, when it flew 
off.’’ || Baldwin saw a broken-winged Golden-Goose chased by 
three Crocodiles. Eventually the bird took to the bank, and the 
poor thing ‘‘ allowed me to catch him on land sooner than face 
his enemies in the water again.” {[ 

To fully understand mimicry we must appreciate general 
animal intelligence, and then we shall probably comprehend how 
much activity has been displayed by animals seeking protection 


st 


* Badminton Mag.’ vol. ii. p. 582. 

+ Cf. Viscount Ebrington, in ‘Red Deer’ (Fur and Feath. Ser.), p. 245. 

} Cf. Himer, ‘ Organic Evolution,’ Engl. transl., p. 237. 

§ Bernett, ‘Gatherings of a Naturalist in Australia, ’ p. 23. 

|| ‘Audubon and His Journals,’ vol. ii. p. 44.—A delightful legend is 
related by Renan on this subject:—‘‘ One of the early Buddhas who pre- 
ceded Sakya-Mouni obtained the nirvana in a singular way. He saw one 
day a Falcon chasing a little bird. ‘I beseech thee,’ he said to the bird 
of prey, ‘leave this little creature in peace: I will give thee its weight from 
my own flesh.’ A small pair of scales descended from the heavens, and the 
transaction was carried out. The little bird settled upon one side of the 
scales, and the saint placed in the other platter a good slice of his flesh, but 
the beam did not move. Bit by bit the whole of his body went into the 
scales, but still the scales were motionless. Just as the last shred of the 
holy man’s body touched the scale the beam fell, the little bird flew away, 
and the saint entered into nirvana” (‘Recollections of my Youth,’ Engl. 
transl., p. 116). 

1 ‘African Hunting and Adventures,’ 3rd edit. p. 15. 


? 


° MIMICRY. 125 


by adaptive and assimilative efforts. This in no way contradicts, 
but supports, the doctrine of Natural Selection. The animal 
survives that can best hide from its enemies, * and this implies 
that the variations that tend to adaptive and assimilative efforts 
not only succeed in the battle of life, but by the selective process 
become dominant, and more and more accentuated with a greater 
need. Mimicry in the lower animals finds its equivalent in what 
is described as “‘tact’’ among men. Few possess it strongly, 
many slightly, and more not at all; while others in the struggle 
for existence depend on different means, and use more varied 
stratagems. ‘Tact is often a silence which mimics the modest 
reticence of a learned man and thus conceals the ignorant. It 
‘appears as the bluster of the psychological moment when the 
coward receives an immunity from his protective resemblance to 
the brave; the rogue often succeeds by mimicking the devout ; 
the sneak assumes the garb of frankness; the lie only triumphs 
when it simulates the truth.t On the other hand, we must not 


* A British lepidopterist has recently remarked: ‘‘It is well known how 
different species of Lepidoptera differ in their habits adopted for protection, 
some relying on very acute vision, others on their resemblance to their 
surroundings ” (‘ Hntomologist,’ vol. xxviii. p. 278). 

+ An observation made by that keen political and social notist, Greville, 
illustrates what is here meant :—‘‘I could not help reflecting what an extra- 
ordinary thing success is in the world, when a man so gifted as Mackintosh 
has failed completely in public life, never having attained honours, reputa- 
tion, or wealth, while so many ordinary men have reaped an abundant 
harvest of all. What a consolation this affords to mediocrity! None can 
approach Mackintosh without admiring his extraordinary powers, and at the 
same time wondering why they have not produced greater effects in the 
world, either of literature or politics. His virtues are obstacles to his 
success; he has not the art of pushing or of making himself feared; he is 
too doucerewx and complimentary; and from some accident or defect in the 
composition of his character, and in the course of events which have 
influenced his circumstances, he has always been civilly neglected’”’ (‘ Greville 
Memoirs,’ 2nd edit., vol. i. p. 242). Ruskin places tact in a purer and higher 
plane when he describes it as “‘ sympathy,—of quick understanding,—of all 
that, in deep insistence on the common but most accurate term, may be 
called the ‘tact’ or ‘touch-faculty,’ of body and soul: that tact which the 
mimosa has in trees, which the pure woman has above all creatures,— 
fineness and fulness of sensation, beyond reason,—the guide and sanctifier 
of reason itself”? (‘Sesame and Lilies,’ edit. 1893, p. 43). Nor must we 
forget the advice of the old Roman courtier to Sir Henry Wotton, as related 
by him to Milton,—pensieri stretti, ed il viso sciolto (thoughts close, coun- 
tenance Open). 


126 THE ZOOLOGIST. P 


overvalue the efficacy of all these attempted concealments. They 
are not all successful,—nothing is, absolutely,—but are still 
means to an end. We are too apt to consider a disguise perfect 
because we have only accidentally discovered it, while at the same — 
time our existence does not depend upon the result of the search. © 
An amateur or an arm-chair naturalist is speechless with wonder 
at the least exhibition of wood-craft, a common attribute of many 
agricultural labourers and. gypsies. Jefferies has accurately 
diagnosed the sense perceptions of a young gamekeeper :—‘‘ He 
will decide at once, asif by a kind of instinct, where any par- 
ticular bird or animal will be found at that hour.” Andina 
similar manner, but in a greater degree, will be formed the 
destructive experience of the bird or mammal whose life depends 
upon the discovery of its prey. Mimicry makes the successful 
search more difficult, the accidental escape more frequent, and 
actual extermination by such means alone, impossible. The 
enemy in his close pursuit finds other prey to satisfy his hunger, 
like the gold prospector who in his quest may come across non- 
auriferous minerals which tend to assuage his financial longings; 
and so an average of destruction is reached, and none alone are 
compelled to be “‘ confessors ” to nature’s inexorable rule. 

It is probable that highly protected or mimicking species are 
only destroyed by their most acutely sense-organized enemies, 
and have a general immunity from the attacks of the ordinary 
animal pirates. We have no more reason to predicate a dead 
level in the intelligence of a single species or genus of animals 
than we have to believe that the same character exists in Homo 
sapiens himself. For in nature, pace Ecclesiastes, the race is to 
the swift, and the battle is to the strong, though the exceptions 
of ‘‘ time and chance” may prove the rule. Stroll along a trout 
stream when anglers are at work, and notice how empty baskets 
reward the majority, or those who perceive not. Now observe 
the skilled killer of Trout, how he will detect a hidden fish 
under the opposite bank, and soon possess the same.* Know- 

* Some persons’ eyes seem to have an extraordinary power of seeing 
through water, and of distinguishing at a glance a fish from a long swaying 
strip of dead brown flag, or the rotting pieces of wood which lie at the 
bottom. The ripple of the breeze, the eddy at the curve, or the sparkle of 


the sunshine cannot deceive them; while others, and by far the greater 
number, are dazzled and see nothing.’’—(Jefferies, ‘Gamekeeper at Home.’). 


MIMICRY. 127 


ledge of habits combined with power of eye and hand are 
successful, and command the intense respect of the ordinary 
floggers of the stream. We may possess the most accurate 
knowledge of whist, and play according to the strictest rules, 
but one of the quartette is a Napoleon in the game, he judges 
and acts with an instinctive finesse, and the odd trick is won. 
Or take the boys in a large stable who are trained to ride 
racehorses at exercise: how few become jockeys; to possess 
“hands,” judgment, nerve, and a knowledge of pace is only an 
occasional gift of the gods. And so in nature at large; all are 
not masters of the game, and the mimicking species have a general 
immunity from attack, save from those incontestable creatures 
who amongst all animal life, including our own, levy their own 
rates, successfully collect their own tithe, and command the 
attention, if not always the love, of their fellows. Animal 
disguise and mimicry serve an ever purpose, if they do not 
constitute a constant end ; they are often partial and exceptional, 
and not in result universal. Like human impostors, they are by 
such means frequently able to live, thrive, and perpetuate their 
kind. But all depends upon not being found out; there must 
be many Mr. Pickwicks and few Sherlock Holmes. To believe 
that a gradual mimicry can slowly arise by the process of natural 
selection which shail be anything but a very partial defence of 
the eatable from the eaters, is to imagine our most intelligent 
and civilized communities capable of being made invulnerable 
from the depredations of thieves and swindlers. An example is 
afforded by the colour of the Common Hare. Prof. Poulton 
makes much of this. He remarks: ‘‘ It would be hardly possible 
to meet with a better example of protective colouring and attitude 
than that of the Hare as it sits motionless, exactly resembling a 
lump of brown earth, for which indeed it is frequently mis- 
taken.”* But the protection thus assumed appears to be 
founded on partial observation. To a casual evolutionist in 
search of evidence, whose knowledge of the animal is not inti- 
mate, and whose pursuit of the same is a chase not sharpened by 
necessity, the Hare affords illustrative importance. But let a 
sportsman, a poacher, or a farmer speak on.the subject, and the 
whole conclusion vanishes. Jefferies may at least be quoted as a 


* * Colours of Animals,’ p. 67. 


128 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


good and careful observer:—‘“‘It is not easy to distinguish a 
Hare when crouching in a ploughed field, his colour harmonises 
so{well with the clods, so that an unpractised eye generally fails 


to note him. An old hand with the gun cannot pass a field 
without involuntarily glancing along the furrows made by the 


plough, to see if their regular grooves are broken by anything 
hiding therein.” .... ‘“‘If you watch the farmers driving to 
market, you will see that they glance up the furrows to note the 
workmanship and look for game; you may tell from a distance if 
they espy a Hare, by the check of the rein and the extended hand 
pointing.”’* Though the American Hare has the colour of its 
pile turned grey in winter, it is still much persecuted by the 
Great Virginian and Snowy Owls, ‘“‘ which prey extensively on 
the animal, keeping it im a constant state of dread, especially 
during winter, when, in common with other rodents, it seeks to 
evade the stoop of rapacious birds by diving: instantly headlong 
into the snow, thus escaping them, but ensuring destruction by 
man, and such animals as the Fisher-cat and Lynx, who can 
easily dig it out.’+ It must not be overlooked that many 
zoologists and evolutionists estimate the survival of the Hare as 
due to the protection acquired by their speed, the animals having 
lived under conditions in which only the swift could escape the 
attacks of their enemies. Besides this aspect, the animal trusts 
to its highly developed cunning. Mr. Kearton, a good and 
practical observer, writes:—‘‘ When Hares are going to seek their 
day or sleeping quarters, they practise a very ingenious trick in 
order to mislead and baffle their enemies. This consists of 
travelling for some distance in a direction they have no intention 
of pursuing, and then doubling back exactly along their own 
track for a good way, and suddenly leaving it by making a 
tremendous sideward bound to right or left. This being accom- 
plished to their satisfaction, they trot off at right angles to the 
path they have just left, and go to their forms.”’{ The Hare 
itself seems to be well aware that the safety gained by colour- 
concealment is very precarious. The poet Somerville knew 
this. 


* § Wild Life in a Southern County,’ new edit., pp. 7-8. 
+ A. Leith Adams, ‘ Field and Forest Rambles,’ p. 80. 
} ‘ Wild Life at Home,’ p. 114. 


MIMICRY. 129 


*¢ So the wise Hares 
Oft quit their seats, lest some more curious eye 
Should mark their haunts, and by dark treacherous wiles 
Plot their destruction.”—(‘ The Chase,’ Book II.).* 


The test of protection is concealment from the keen search of 
enemies, not merely an assimilative process, as noted by casual 
observers. Of course a partial concealment is a partial protec- 
tion, but it is difficult to see how this applies to the Hare, and in 
the Transvaal, where most of these lines were written, I found it as 
foolish an animal, and one as easy to discover and shoot, as in 
England. Dietrich de Winckell, who according to Prince Kro- 
potkin “is considered to be among the best acquainted with the 
habits of Hares, describes them as passionate players, becoming 
so intoxicated by their play that a Hare has been known to take 
an approaching Fox for a playmate.” + Describers are often 
carried away by their enthusiasm for the theory of mimicry and 
give their pens great licence. Thus, Dr. Meyer, speaking of the 
neighbourhood of Kilima-njaro, writes: ‘‘ The insects, too, have 
their ‘magic mantle’ of invisibility. No wonder it is difficult to 
make a collection, when the Butterflies and Crickets look like 
leaves and dry blades, the Cicade like leaf-stems, the Spiders 
like thorns, the Phasmodez like bare twigs, the Beetles like 
stones and bits of earth, the Moths like mosses and lichens.” { 
Much, very much, has been made of the mimetic resemblance of 
the upper surface of Flatflshes to the bottom on which they 
rest. Mr. C. L. Jackson has given the result of a most interest- 
_ ing experiment he made by placing a number of small Flatfish in 
a tank which contained ten or twelve large Cod averaging fully 
twenty pounds weight each. These at once dashed after the 
Flatfish, ‘‘ which instantly covered themselves with sand and 
apparently disappeared. ‘The Cod, however, knew better. They 
commenced to hunt for them, carefully and systematically 
quartering their ground as a well-trained pointer would do, and 
affording a beautiful illustration of the use of the curious ‘beard’ 
possessed by many members of the Cod family. By-and-by, 
one of them, by means of this feeler, detected one of the 


* Cf. C. C. Coe, ‘ Nature versus Natural Selection,’ p. 184. 
+ ‘ Nineteenth Century,’ vol. xxviii. p. 706. 
{ * Across Hast African Glaciers,’ p. 80. 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., March, 1&00. K 


130 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


youngsters and put it up. Away it went, full speed, followed by 
one, two, or three of the huge monsters. No Greyhound fancier 
ever saw a better bit of coursing as the little chap doubled and 
turned with the greatest agility, while over and over again the 
great lumbering Cod overshot their mark, and the little fish went 
to earth, only, however, to be again routed out and hunted until 
not one was left.’’* 

The theory of mimicry is probably the still imperfect recog- 
nition of a great truth which is struggling to survive a mass of 
more or less irrelevant evidence too frequently offered in its 
support. It has long been regarded as an unconscious registra- 
tion of a preservative action of Natural Selection; it is here 
suggested that it is largely an act of conscious animal volition. 
Whatever view be held, this alone is certain, that the theory in 
either its demonstrated or suggestive enunciation has been the 
means of a vast record of facts pertaining to the life-histories of 
animals and plants which would otherwise have remained either 
unobserved or disregarded. 


* * Lancashire Sea Fisheries,’ pp. 34-5. 


( 131 ) 


THE MOVEMENTS OF STARLINGS. 
By H. E. Forrest, Hon. Sec. Caradoc and 8S. V. Field Club. 


STARLINGS are so familiar to us all, whether living in town or 
country, that it would be natural to suppose we know all about 
their habits and economy, and that it would be almost impossible 
to find anything fresh to say about them. Up to a very recent 
date the writer was of the same opinion; but certain events led 
to his making investigations, and these have resulted in the pen- 
ning of the present article, which he hopes will at least add to 
our knowledge of the movements of these interesting birds at 
different seasons of the year. 

Perhaps no habit of the Starling has been more often described 
than their collecting in multitudes in autumn to roost together 
in reed-beds, &c. This may conveniently be made the starting- 
point in our investigations, and Shropshire the field of our 
enquiries. 

The following is a list of the principal “roosts” in the 
county, with details as to the character of each place, and the 
name of the observer who has reported on the same :— 

_ Alkmond Pool, two miles north of Shrewsbury. — A small 
sheet of water with trees on one side, and beds of osiers and 
reeds on projecting tongues of land on opposite sides. The 
Starlings roost on the reeds in tens of thousands.—H. E. Forrest. 

Moreton Corbet, six miles north-east of Shrewsbury. — A 
coppice called Dawson’s Rough; one of the biggest roosts in the 
county. ‘The Starlings here probably number over a million, 
and roost on the hazel underwood. Pheasants roost on the big 
trees, but the odour of the Starlings and their droppings causes 
them to quit each year. The keepers have tried to drive away 
the Starlings by shooting, &c., but without any final success.— 
W. H. Parry. 

_.Colemere Mere, Ellesmere.—A large sheet of water with 
extensive reed-beds. The Starlings used to resort to the reeds 
K2 


132 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


in countless numbers, but during the last few years have come in 
greatly reduced numbers.—Brownlow R. C. Tower. 

Llanforda, Oswestry.—In a wood.—G. D. Lees. 

Chorlton, near Whitchurch.—In a covert. The birds came in 
millions, and destroyed the trees and undergrowth.—G. D. Lees. 

Breidden Hills.—Two coverts at Great Woolasson.—Rev. W. 
FP. L. Harrisou. | 

Nesscliffe-—At the south end of Ensdon Clump, in bushes.— 
Chas. Kempster. | 

Baschurch.—By the pool in Boreatton Park, in shrubs. — E. 
H., O. Sankey. 

Ruyton XI. Towns.—In a wood; and at Fennymere, a reedy 
pool surrounded by trees.—EH. H. O. Sankey. 

Caynton, Newport.—In the reeds round the pool, and in an 
osier-bed.—G. H. Paddock. 

Rowton Gorse, near Crudgington Station. —A Fox-covert, 
mainly privet bushes. Starlings roost here in such numbers 
that they drive the Foxes away. Large numbers were shot in 
hopes that the birds would leave, and a portion removed a short 
distance to Pointon; but the original roost was never forsaken.— 
A. HE. Payne. 

Kilsall, Shifnal.—In a reed-bed.— Daniel Jones. 

Albrighton.—At Snowdon Pool, on the Patshull estate—the 
borders of Shropshire and Staffordshire—on reeds. — #. A. 
Joynson. 

Bridgnorth.—At Tasley, in a covert with osiers.—F. A. 
Joynson. 

Bridgnorth.—At Hilton, five miles north-east, in a plantation. 
Also at Gatacre Park; Starlings used to resort in thousands to 
a laurel plantation, which in a few years they destroyed, and then 
left.—H. Ll. Gatacre. 

Madeley.—Three roosts close together were used by large 
flocks till recently, but are now almost deserted. One was in a 
covert called Lee Dingle, another an exposed plantation on high 
ground, and the third a rough field full of high hawthorn bushes. 
—R. EH. Anstice. 

Harley, Much Wenlock.—In bushes on a hill.—T. R. Horton. 

Ludlow. — Oakley Park, on reeds by the decoy pools.— 
H. Gray. 


THE MOVEMENTS OF STARLINGS. 133 


Ludlow.—Moor Park. In asmall plantation the birds roost 
in tens of thousands.—J. Palmer. 

Wooferton.—In an immense hawthorn hedge twenty to thirty 
feet high.—J. Palmer. 

Many interesting details have been furnished by the various 
observers, but want of space prevents our giving anything beyond 
a summary. 

In the great majority of cases the roosts have been occupied 
by the Starlings regularly for upwards of twenty years. In only 
a few cases have the established roosts been deserted, and then 
probably the birds have only gone to a neighbouring roost. In 
no instance has an entirely new roosting-place been started. It 
will be noticed that the roosts are of three classes—(1) on reeds, 
(2) on trees or underwoods, (8) on osiers. We shall see later on 
that the nature of the roost has an important bearing on the 
duration of its occupancy by the Starlings. Lastly, it will be 
seen by a reference to a map that the distance between one 
roost and another varies from less than two miles to about 
thirteen miles. There are considerable tracts of country from 
which no reports have been sent in, and it would be safe to 
assume that there are a few roosts in these districts which are 
not recorded in the above list. On this ground the average 
distance of the roosts from one another can scarcely exceed eight 
miles. 

Before quitting this part of the subject a few details may be 
given regarding some of the roosts. 

Mr. W. H. Parry resides at Shawbury, close to the Moreton 
Corbet roost. He says that there is an enormous pear tree in 
his orchard, used by the Starlings as an outpost. They alight 
on it in great masses, so that it quite bends beneath their weight, 
and, upon their quitting it, the tree rebounds with such force that 
it continues to oscillate for some time. This and a few other 
trees in the surrounding fields are only used as outposts; the birds 
do not roost there, but in the coppice farther on. When alighting 
on the pear tree the birds generally make a loud chatter, but not 
always—sometimes there is no noise but the rushing sound of 
their wings. The ground and hazel underwood in the coppice 
are covered with the birds’ droppings, and the fetid odour arising 
from these and the massed birds is perceptible at a considerable 


134 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


distance. The number of birds assembling each night in autumn 
at this roost is enormous, and towards the end of September or 
early in October it is further increased by flocks from Caynton 
and other places. The reason for this is curious. Where the roost — 
is situated on a reed-bed, the reeds get so completely broken 
down in autumn—when they are much more brittle than in 
summer—that the Starlings cannot get a footing on them. Thus 
it happens that roosts of this kind are always deserted early in 
October. At Caynton Mr. Paddock says that when the reeds 
break down the Starlings resort to a bed of osiers on another part 
of the pool, and finally desert those when the leaves fall off. — 
Roosts of the other class—on trees and underwoods—are resorted 
to much longer. Indeed, the one at Moreton Corbet is never 
quite deserted; a few small flocks resorting to it through the 
winter and spring, and even in the breeding season. 

The general habits of the Starling may be thus described: 
During summer they scatter in pairs all over the country to breed, 
except perhaps small flocks of young birds that do not breed. 
Even now they seem not to lose their gregariousness, for I have 
often found from twenty to thirty nests within such a limited area 
as the ruins of Haughmond Abbey. This is probably more 
apparent than real, and is due to the number of convenient 
nesting-holes in such localities. The nest is generally placed in 
some kind of cavity—in a hole in a tree or wall, under the eaves 
of houses, amongst piles of loose stones, in a rotten tree-stump, 
&c. Very rarely it is open to the air, and last year I noticed a 
very queer instance on the Buries, close to my house at Bayston 
Hill. It was on a large branch of a very tall ash tree close to 
the trunk, and, as far as I could see from below, was made 
entirely of sheep’s wool! I watched the bird on and off the nest 
several times, or should never have recognized the lump of wool 
as a Starling’s nest. 

Mr. R. Moses writes that for several years in succession two 
Starlings’ nests were to be seen in Shrewsbury, wedged in be- 
tween two chimney-stacks four inches apart; they rested on 
nothing, and it is a mystery how the birds began them. Mr. 
Palmer says he has several times found the nest in ivy against 
a tree-trunk. 

Ordinarily the nest is an untidy mass of hay or straw, lined 


THE MOVEMENTS OF STARLINGS. 135 


with a few feathers or bits of wool. The eggs are of a lovely pale 
blue, sometimes white, and vary greatly in size and proportions. 
As soon as the young are hatched the parents display intense 
activity in searching for food to satisfy their enormous appetites. 
There are generally five or six nests round my house, and I often 
watch the Starlings from my bedroom window while dressing in 
the morning. They regularly search every inch of the lawn for 
worms, insects, and grubs, and never failed to do this during the 
past dry summer, although, as there were hardly any worm-casts 
to be seen, the worms had evidently left the surface-soil and 
retired to the moister earth below; so that the search must have 
been rather a ‘‘ forlorn hope.” As soon as the Starlings have 
exhausted the lawn they go farther afield, and they do an immense 
amount of good by destroying noxious grubs and insects. In 
reply to a letter of mine on the subject, the Rev. J. B. Meredith 
writes :—‘‘T agree with you that Starlings are most useful birds. 
I do not think they affect the earthworm which makes the worm- 
casts so much as the wireworm; hence their diligent search of 
your lawn even in the drought. You have evidently never had 
your cherry trees cleared by them in dozens and in scores as I 
have every year; and I have also caught them in the act of 
stealing raspberries, currants, damsons, and ripe pears—watched 
them gorging at them—though they do not systematically go for 
these as they do for cherries.”’ 

In regard to this matter, the only cherry tree in my garden is 
a “ Morello,” and the fruit is too sour for most birds. I have 
not seen the Starlings attack the other fruits mentioned, but 
have seen Blackbirds doing so frequently. 

Mr. G. H. Paddock relates that his father used to shoot the 
Starlings round the house at Caynton, Newport; he urged him 
not to do so on the ground that they were such useful birds in 
destroying worms, &c., and at last persuaded him to give them a 
year’s trial. As he anticipated, “the difference in the turf was 
most marked ; it was no longer unsightly from worm-expellings, 
the Starlings hunting it over first thing every morning.” Since 
then they have been protected; an empty oyster-barrel which 
Mr. Paddock put up for them in a tree was adopted for a nesting- 
place by a pair of Starlings the very next morning. Under date 
Dec, 9th, 1899, Mr, Paddock adds ;—‘ During this summer the 


136 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


whole of my choice carnations were attacked by wireworms, and 
I noticed Starlings continually amongst the plants. This appears 
to bear out Mr. Meredith’s suggestion.” Dr. Sankey says :— 
‘Starlings feed greatly on animal food; those that I dissected 
some time back had their crops full of caterpillars,” and they pick 
them off oak trees when infested. The stomachs of some that 
were killed at Shawbury during frosty weather in December 
were found to contain spurts from wheat, as well as spurting 
wheat-grains, and a few small weed-seeds. The damage done 
to one wheat-field necessitated its being resown. On the other 
hand, Mr. Beckwith found that no bird checked the ravages of 
the Agrotis moth so effectually as the Starling. 

To return to our subject. As soon as the young are able to 
fly the Starlings go out every morning to feed, keeping together 
in family parties, and particularly frequenting meadows where 
sheep and cattle are grazing, to pick up the insects disturbed by 
their feet. They return each night to the nest to roost. The 
young grow so rapidly, however, that soon there is not room for 
them in the nest. In this emergency some other sleeping-place 
has to be found, and what place would so naturally recur to the 
minds of the parent birds as the spot where they roosted in the 
previous autumn ? The parents and children start off together, 


and on the way fall in with another little family party bent on ~* 


the same errand; then another and another, till, by the time the 
tryst 1s reached, the flock numbers several hundreds. Perhaps 
for the first few evenings the total assemblage will not be very 
large, but as successive families realize the necessity of quitting 
their nesting-places the congress increases night by night. Very 
few sights in the bird-world are so impressive as one of these 
great gatherings of the clans. About an hour before sunset the 
first flocks begin to arrive at the appointed place. These do not 
settle down at once, but continue to fly around; soon other 
flocks arrive in quick succession from all points of the compass, 
till the heavens are literally darkened by the cloudy masses of 
birds. ‘They now proceed to execute in the air a series of com- 
plicated evolutions, like regiments of soldiers on a review day— 
charging forwards, wheeling to right and left, crossing and re- 
crossing over and under, converging and diverging, coalescing 
and separating, till at last, just after sunset, as if by one consent, 


THE MOVEMENTS OF STARLINGS. 137 


the whole body of birds descends like an avalanche, with a 
mighty rushing sound of wings, and covers every tree, shrub, and 
reed with a living freight so heavy that they bend almost to the 
earth beneath their burden. Now ensues a perfect babel of 
chatter, which continues for several minutes, till the last “‘ good 
nights” have been said, and darkness and silence descend on the 
scene. The effect of any sudden sound, such as the stroke 
of an oar falling flat on the water, is startling. Instantly the 
thousands of Starlings rise into the air uttering cries of alarm, 
with much fluttering of wings, only to resettle the next minute, 
amid congratulatory murmurs of satisfaction, till silence is again 
restored. 

Not always, however, is the scene thus peaceful. If there is a 
Sparrowhawk in the vicinity that has not fallen a victim to the 
keeper’s gun—alas, how few do escape—it can hardly fail to dis- 
cover such a happy hunting-ground as this. Two of my corre- 
spondents mention that Sparrowhawks have been seen haunting 
the roosts, and occasionally dashing into the throng to seize a 
Starling, its companions fleeing in every direction with mournful 
terror-stricken screams. 

Midnight. All quiet. 

Morning dawns. The Starlings begin to wake and twitter, 
and preen their feathers Before the sun is well up they are off; 
scattered all over the country to their daily avocation of picking 
up their food. Now, however, instead of keeping together in 
families, they go about in small parties, and this habit they retain 
throughout the remainder of the year. 

We now approach the most difficult part of our subject—the 
movements of Starlings between the middle of November (when 
the big roosts are nearly deserted) and the following spring, when 
they return to their nesting-places. It would only weary the 
reader to state all the little details upon which the following 
conclusions are based, so I will here only indicate briefly what I 
believe to be the actual facts. In order to make the matter clear, 
it will facilitate matters if we divide our native Starlings into 
three main groups :— 

(1) Starlings that migrate. 

(2) Starlings in towns. 

(3) Starlings in the country. 


138 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Anyone who observes our local birds must notice that the 
number of Starlings in any given neighbourhood suffers a great 
and sudden diminution some time in late autumn, and there is 
pretty good evidence that this is caused by emigration. The Rev. 
R. T. Kempthorne, who lived formerly in Cornwall, tells me that 
in that county the Starling is only a winter visitor, and rarely, if 
ever, breeds there. Mr. Howard Saunders, in his ‘ Manual,’ 
says :—‘‘ Large flocks arrive on our east coasts in autumn, at 
which season there is a marked migration westward, localities in 
the interior of this country which have been frequented during 
the summer being then almost deserted, while great numbers 
visit the south of Ireland. . . . Throughout the greater part 
of the Mediterranean basin it is only a cold weather visitor, 
although at that season it occurs in almost incredible numbers.” 
Towards the end of autumn enormous flocks of Starlings and 
Peewits appear on our western coasts, particularly in Merioneth- 
shire, Pembrokeshire, and Cornwall. We may conclude, there- 
fore, that a large proportion of our inland Starlings leave us then, 
and go westwards. In reply to a letter of mine, Mr. Howard 
Saunders writes that the Starlings in the north of Europe, where 
in winter the ground is as hard as iron, go to the south. 

(2) Starlings in towns, during winter, assimilate in their 
habits to Sparrows. They are hardly at all gregarious, but live 
on housetops, feeding on anything that falls in their way. It 
rarely happens that more than two or four are seen together, and 
I fancy that these are paired birds returning to their old nesting- 
places as a kind of head-quarters whence to forage around. 

(3) Starlings in the country, during winter, behave quite 
differently ; they go about in smail flocks, sometimes alone, but 
more often in company with other birds that frequent fields, 
especially Rooks and Peewits. Around Shrewsbury. Peewits are 
very numerous, and it seems to me that there exists some bond 
of sympathy between them and Starlings, for we rarely see a 
flock of Peewits without its attendant train of Starlings. If the 
Peewits move into the next field, the Starlings do the same; 
while, if the former continue to wheel about in the air for some 
time, the Starlings wait till they settle, and then rejoin them. 
In severe weather Peewits leave the inland meadows and descend 
to the coasts in search of food, On Dec.:11th, 1899, a hard 


THE MOVEMENTS OF STARLINGS. 139 


frost began. Next day al! our local Peewits disappeared : so did 
the flocks of Starlings. There were no Peewits to be seen after 
that date, nor any Starlings (except pairs about houses) till 
Jan. 4th, when both re-appeared in flocks on the meadows near 
Shrewsbury. 

Whether each group of Starlings attaches itself to a particular 
group of Peewits or Rooks, we have no means of knowing, but it 
is hardly likely, as the size of the flocks varies greatly from day 
to day. The reasons why these different birds associate together 
are probably :— 

(1) That they are similar in their tastes as regards food. 

(2) That they are all very wary birds, and associate for 
mutual protection. 

Parenthetically, we may remark that the Starling is remarkable 
for unfailing good temper—he never quarrels with his company, 
nor is he treated as an intruder. 

At-night the Starlings that have kept company with the 
Rooks and Peewits all day retire to an ivy-clad tree or wall to 
roost. They may: then be found occasionally in numbers up to 
a hundred or two; but these are only accidental gatherings— 
very different in character to the big roosts before-mentioned— 
and the birds do not travel any distance from their feeding- 
ground; they merely go to roost in the nearest convenient place. 

The following incident evinces the existence of a strong spirit 
of comradeship amongst Starlings. Mr. D. H. Meares shot a 
Starling on the ground out of a flock at about eighty yards 
distance, when the whole flock rose and hovered round their 
companion, swaying up and down in the air over it in a triangular 
formation ; some even tried to lift it; this continued for several 
minutes. 

Reverting for a moment to the subject of ‘ Roosts,” we 
noticed, early in this paper, that the average distance between 
one roost and another was not more than eight miles, so that the 
radius of the area appropriated to each would be four miles. If 
we treat the area as a square it would contain sixty-four square 
miles. I believe that if all the roosts were recorded, we should 
find that this estimate is over the mark, and that the relative 
area is really much smaller. Anyone who has witnessed, as I 
have, the enormous multitudes of birds that assemble at some of 


140 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


the roosts will hardly conceive it possible that they are natives 
only of the limited area surrounding the roost, and we can only 
conclude that the true natives of the district receive additional 
numbers that migrate thither from outside districts or even from 
the Continent. | 

I will conclude with a statement which may perhaps be re- 
ceived with incredulity. Nearly all ornithological writers say 
that Starlings breed two, and occasionally three times a year. 
Careful observation has convinced me that a very large propor- 
tion of Starlings—perhaps one-half—rear only one brood in the 
year ; many rear two broods. I have never known three broods, 
and there are some Starlings that do not breed at all. Mr. 
G. W. Murdoch, Natural History Editor of the ‘ Yorkshire 
Weekly Post,’ writes in reply to a query on this point :—“ In 
Hants Starlings very often breed twice a year; I never knew 
them do so in Scotland. I am of opinion that a good many 
Starlings never breed at all, but for what cause I know not. That 
is also the opinion of my friend the Rev. H. A. Macpherson, M.A., 
author of ‘ The Fauna of Lakeland.’” Mr. E.8.Cobbold writes 
in April, 1899 :—‘‘ Why are the Starlings congregating in flocks 
now? Hundreds fly over Stretton from the south-east at 5 or 
6 p.m. to roost, I think, in a Scotch fir-plantation near; I have 
seen them three nights in succession, and on April 8rd I saw 
rather large flocks down by Craven Arms feeding together.” He 
adds that at the very time when he saw the flocks flying overhead, 
the Starlings that were breeding about his house were busy 
looking after their nests or young, and did not take any 
notice of the others, much less offer to fly off after them. ‘Is 
it,’ he concludes, “‘the autumn habit not yet abandoned? I 
am inclined to think not, for I remember in previous years 
noticing them early in summer, when I supposed they had done 
breeding.” 

A simple and probable explanation of the phenomenon is 
this :—When Starlings rear two broods in the year, the second 
brood would be younger than the first by some two months or 
so. When the breeding season comes round in the following 
spring, the second broods are not sufficiently adult to breed, and, 
not having any duties to call them elsewhere, they naturally 
continue to resort at night to the old familiar roost. This 


THE MOVEMENTS OF STARLINGS. 141 


supposition also accounts for the presence of a small number of 
birds at the roost, even during the breeding season—a fact 
alluded to at the end of the description of the roost at Moreton 
Corbet. 

With reference to the migrations of the Starlings that leave 
us, we seldom witness the actual departure, and still more seldom 
see their return; but this is not singular—we may say the same 
of all inland migrations. On the coasts the departures and 
arrivals are much more evident. Mr. D. H. Meares saw, on one 
occasion, several thousand Starlings roosting on the ground in a 
ploughed field close to Shawbury village ; he supposed that they 
were preparing for a night flight. In returning to their inland 
quarters in spring, the birds arrive on our coasts in large 
numbers, but, after resting awhile, they continue their flight in 
such small bodies that they are not noticed. 

The Starlings which remain here through the winter, in 
company with Peewits and Rooks, exhibit a tendency to break 
up into gradually smaller and smaller parties. ‘Towards the end 
of February many pairs are to be found at their old breeding 
haunts. At this period the Peewits still keep together in large 
flocks, not pairing off till March; by that time their attendant 
Starlings have deserted them. 


142 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


MAMMALIA. 


INSECTIVORA. 


Curious Variety of the Mole.— During last autumn five Moles (Talpa 
europea) were caught on different dates at Morvilie, near Bridgnorth, 
Salop. They were of a peculiar colour—glossy light pearl-grey all over, 
except the under parts, which were bright buff, the general effect being 
very pretty. On Noy. 11th Mr. W. F. Warren kindly sent me one in the 
flesh, which is now in the Shrewsbury Museum. I have seen mounted 
cream and buff coloured Moles before, but never one like the above.— 
H. E. Forrest (Shrewsbury). 


Lesser Shrew in Worcestershire.—As upon reference I cannot find 
that the Lesser Shrew (Sorex minutus) has been taken previously in this 
county, it may be as well to record one taken by the writer at Lower 
Hagley on Jan. 19th last.—J. SreeLe-Ewuiott (Clent, Worcestershire). 


Water Shrews taken Three Miles from Water.— During a short trip 
to Banstead last August, trapping small mammals, I was lucky enough to 
catch three Water Shrews (Neomys fodiens) (two males and a female), two 
in a small copse, and one in a hedge adjoining, at a distance of about three 
miles from water. The weather was excessively. hot, and the ground likea 
rock. I think this is the first authentic British record of the occurrence 
of this Shrew at such a distance from water. I am aware that it is well 
known that this Shrew can exist at some little distance from water, as the 
following quotations show; but I think my record will be found to be the 
farthest known :—Bell’s ‘ Brit. Quads.’: “ It is often found at some distance 
from water. There can be no doubt that it occasionally seeks its food on 
the land, probably when it has exhausted the ditch or brook to which it has 
attached itself.” Also Jenyns, in his ‘ Brit. Verts.,’ mentions: ‘ My speci- 
men was taken in a corn-field at some distance from any water.” If this 
question were looked up I have no doubt it would be found that this 
animal can live entirely away from water like the Vole.— C. H. B. Grant 
(Putney). 


NOTHS AND QUERIES. 143 


AVES. 


Early Appearance of Chiffchaff.—On Feb. 25th I noticed a Chiffchaff 
(Phylloscopus rufus) in a local farmyard. The bird was briskly catching 
flies, and appeared to be in good condition.— Ww. Detves, Jun. (May- 
nard’s Green, Horeham Road, Sussex). 


Great Tit nesting in active Bee-hive.— In the Chester Museum 
there is exhibited in a glass case a Blue Tit’s nest in an empty bee-hive. 
A far stranger incident occurred last year at Ludlow. A Great Tit (Parus 
major) built a nest aud laid twelve eggs in the midst of an active bee-hive. 
The bird went in and out through the same entrance-hole that was used by 
the Bees, and neither bird nor insects seemed to interfere with each other- 
The hive was about half-full of honeycomb, and the Bees hard at work the 
whole time. The eggs were taken on May 2nd by Mr. J. Palmer, Secre- 
tary of the county Bee-keepers’ Association, who reported the circumstances 
to me.—H. HE. Forrest (Bayston Hill, near Shrewsbury). 


Nesting Habits of the Great Tit.—While thanking Mr. Tuck for his 
suggestion (ante, p. 82), I should like to say that I am aware that Parus 
major is sometimes in the habit of covering the eggs of an incomplete 
clutch with loose nest-materials. In these cases the nests are ‘“‘ apparently 
unfinished.” Among the tenants of his nesting-boxes Mr, Tuck does not 
mention the Robin, which has used boxes here. — O. V, Artin (Bloxham, 
Oxon). 


Marsh-Harrier in Berkshire.—A Marsh-Harrier (Circus eruginosus), 
which, I believe, to be a three years’ old cock, was shot Oct. 2nd, 1899, by 
my nephew Ralph Cooper; his wing was only just tipped, and in three 
weeks he could fly quite strong again. I keep him in a large wire aviary, 
where he can have a good thirty yards’ fly when he wishes, and have one 
corner covered on the top, and the sides done up with ivy, where he roosts 
on the top of a large bavin. He is fed on Sparrows, Rats, and Rabbits.— 
T. Terry Cooper (Swallowfield, near Reading). 

[This note was received through our correspondent Mr. George W- 
Bradshaw, who writes that the bird has also been seen and identified by 
Mr. H. M. Wallis, M.B.O.U., of Reading.—Ep.] 


Nesting of the Hobby in Shropshire. — Last summer a pair of 
Hobbies (Falco subbuteo) nested near Ludlow, utilizing a Crow’s nest 
several years old in the top of a large oak tree, but adding a little fresh 
lining of birch-twigs and bracken-stalks. Early in May the male was 
found dead near the tree, but the hen went away and quickly returned 
with a new mate. The first clutch of three eggs was taken July 1st, but 
it is believed that the birds bred again, as they remained in the neighbour- 


144 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


hood, and were seen repeatedly throughout the summer.—H. HE. Forrest 
(Bayston Hill, near Shrewsbury). 


The Great Lapwing Year. A Correction.—I beg to correct an error 
in my notes on Golden Plover and Lapwings (ante, p. 40), in eleventh line 
from top. The words “ more numerous than in any year since 1878 (the 
great Lapwing year”); it should be 1879. — Robert Warren (Moyview, 
Ballina). 


Land Birds at Sea.— With reference to the interesting communication 
on this subject by Surgeon Hurlestone Jones (ante, p. 51), I am able toadd ~ 
two species to his list of land birds observed straggling out to sea. On 
February 24th, 1891, on §.S. ‘ Wordsworth,’ bound for Brazil and the 
Plate River, a small unfamiliar Warbler settled upon the deck, and was 
seen several times during the day. We had last sighted land at Cape 
Finisterre, and the observations for noon of that day (24th) showed that 
our position was lat. 40° 12’ N. by long. 12° 48’ W., so that at the time 
we were a considerable distance from the coast of Portugal. The little 
bird followed the vessel the whole day, but was not seen the following 
morning when we arrived at Madeira about six o’clock. I was unable to 
identify the species, but a conspicuous yellowish stripe over the eye led me 
to believe it was Phylloscopus superciliosus. Whether our little visitor 
reached land in safety or was drowned J am unable to say. Upon the 
previous day, in lat. 44° 23’ by long. 10° 24’, a Sky-Lark (Alauda arvensis) 
flew close to the ship, but was not observed to settle, and soon disappeared. 
At about the same position, on April 29th, in the middle of the Bay of 
Biscay, two others accompanied the vessel for some distance. Another 
species which I have observed under similar conditions is the Wheatear 
(Saxicola wnanthe), which flew on board the Orient steamer ‘ Garonne’ on 
Aug. 27th. 1892, off the coast of Norway, long out of sight of land, but un- 
fortunately my notes do not give the exact position. We were, however, 
about a day’s journey from the land. A Turtle-Dove (Turtur communis), 
Starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and House-Sparrow (Passer domesticus) accom- 
panied us for nearly a day between Harwich and Hamburg on Oct. Ist, 
1899. At the time the birds were observed we must have been nearest to 
the coast of Holland or Friesland, and I have no doubt that they all reached 
the land in safety.—Matcotm Burr (New College, Oxford). 


PISCKES. ! 
Sea-Lamprey at Shrewsbury.—On June 13th a boy caught a Sea- 
Lamprey (Petromyzon marinus), thirty inches long, in the Severn, below 
the Welsh Bridge, at Shrewsbury. It rarely occurs so high up the river, 


though formerly common in the estuary. — H. E. Forrusr (Bayston Hill, 
near Shrewsbury). 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 145 


ORGANIC EVOLUTION. 


Remarks relating to Mimicry.—I am obliged to Mr. C. T. Rope for 
informing me (p. 85) of the likelihood of black Ducks throwing white 
feathers ; in the case of the drake and two ducks under my observation the 
drake alone did this. The nesting Fowl certainly does not hiss as clearly 
as a Duck; nevertheless it makes a puffing sound of the same nature, 
and apparently made in just the same way. It would be indeed a triumph 
of mimicry for an animal not only to feign death, but also the appearance 
of the decay which usually supervenes. In the case mentioned by Mr. 
Rope—that of Bombinator igneus—the shrinking might perhaps be caused 
by an effort towards smallness rather than the appearance of decay ; other- 
wise a batrachian might be capable of mimicking its own skeleton, which is 
hardly likely. Unconscious mimicry, apparently due to sexual relations, is 
a common feature in wedded couples, who notoriously tend to resemble 
each other in facial expression, if not in feature, after many years of 
cohabitation. This may be consequent upon developed similarity of 
thought, or something else. Some cynics would deny that it was due to 
mutual affection.—CuarLes A. WITCHELL. 


4ool. 4th ser. vol. IV., March, 1900. L 


146 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


The Races of Man: an Outline of Anthropology and Ethnography. 
By J. Denker, Sc.D. (Paris). Walter Scott, Limited. 


Eweuisu readers have long been familiar with the writings 
of French anthropologists. The names of Broca, Topinard, and 
De Quatrefages are quite household words among those who 
study the zoology of their own kith and kin, while the present 
work of Dr. Deniker will further increase our respect for the 
capacities of anthropologists across the Channel. There is 
always room for a fresh book on Man; the multitude of subjects 
that make for his history are truly complicated; each student 
and professor is always stronger on his particular specialty 
than on others; we leave the school of anatomy to study written 
records; from the unwritten testimony of prehistoric archeology 
we turn to the problems of philology; the physician and the 
zoologist compare notes; one measures the skull, another photo- 
graphs the features; the traveller publishes his notes, the 
missionary gives his experience; the prison, the hospital, and 
the lunatic asylum alike contribute to our knowledge; the 
statistician, the comparative theologian, and the recruiting 
sergeant all have something to tell, while many a forgotten book 
contains the only detail of a vanished or vanishing race. Con- 
sequently to bring the subject up to date is a quest and nota 
feasibility; there is always something behind the arras. 

Dr. Deniker in the present volume has added much to our 
knowledge by referring us to recent work that has been done, and 
his bibliographical notes are valuable. The general reader may 
learn much as to races other than savage, even as regards such 
a familiar being as the Jew. Of these people, contrary to 
general ideas, only some 250,000 are stated to be found in Asia, 
and Palestine can only claim about 75,000 in the present day. 
‘Their total number is estimated at eight millions, of which the 
half is in Russia and Rumania, a third in Germany and Austria, 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 147 


and a sixth in the rest of the world, even as far as Australia. 
The great majority of Jews are unacquainted with Hebrew, which 
is a dead language; they speak, according to the country they 
inhabit, particular kinds of jargon, the most common of which 
is the Judeo-German.” A foot-note also points out the well- 
established fact that the isolation of the Jews from the rest of 
the peoples is not complete, as other races have been converted 
to Judaism. This may be taken as an instance of the concise 
information to be found in the volume, which is well illustrated 
from original photographs. 

Among the few opinions that Dr. Deniker allows himself to 
formulate is one as to the use of the laryngeal sacs in the 
Orang-utan. These, considerably larger than those of the 
Gorilla, may “serve him as air-cushions to lessen the enormous 
weight of the jaw resting on the trachea.” 


A Book of Whales. By F. E. Brepparp, M.A., F.R.S. 
John Murray. 


Tue Cetacea have long required treatment in a handy but 
authentic book of reference. They have received great attention 
from two late naturalists who both held high official positions at 
the British Museum—Dr. Gray and Sir William Flower. Dr. 
Gray wonderfully increased the number of these animals by the 
descriptions of proposed new species, while his successor, Sir 
William Flower, endeavoured to analyse these creations of the 
printing press and to restore the balance of Cetacean nature. 
Now, as Mr. Beddard writes, the student of the Cetacea “ has to 
deal with not more than thirty-five genera and almost eighty 
species.” | 

The origin of these immense creatures, which ‘‘ are not only 
the largest of living mammals, but the largest of all animals, 
mammalian or. otherwise, which have ever existed,” is still 
unsettled, and Mr. Beddard takes a cautious position after a 
consideration of the views of both Professors Albrecht and Max 
Weber, the first of whom inclines to the view that the Cetacea 
are the nearest thing now existing to the hypothetical ‘‘ Pro- 
mammalia,”’ and the second that they are not primitive Mammalia 


148 THE..Z00LOGIST. 


at all. The view held in this volume is that “ The general 
conclusion which best suits the facts at our disposal seems to be 
to look upon the Cetacea as an off-shoot from an early group of 
the higher Mammalia. This is unsatisfactory in 1ts vagueness, 
no doubt; but it is difficult to see what more can be said which 
is not entirely speculative and devoid of foundation in ascertained 
fact.” 

The enumeration of the species is happily treated on the 
synthetic method, but the question of specific consideration is a 
complex one. Not only are specimens not easily procurable, but 
the skeletons of stranded examples do not altogether solve the 
problem. ‘‘ Two quite different species might conceivably have 
a quite similar skeleton, showing their specific difference only in 
colour and other outward features.”’ 

Mr. Beddard has well attained his desire to write “a solid 
book tempered by anecdote,” and to illustrate by the means of 
Whales ‘“‘a very important biological generalisation, the intimate 
relation between structure and environment.” The book is well 
illustrated by Mr. Berridge, and is written throughout with a 
greater tendency to fact than speculation. On this point the 
author’s words are clear: ‘Nothing is more difficult in zoology 
than to arrive at convenient generalisations—for the paradoxical 
reason that it is so easy to frame hypotheses. The expression 
‘simplex sigillum veri,’ not composed for the purpose for which 
it is used, and yet used with such frequency in zoological writing, 
especially in the newer developments of what is called sometimes 
‘Darwinism,’ has had a most deleterious effect upon speculation. 
A simple and obvious explanation often seems to such writers to 
settle the question at issue. And yet in the long run it seems 
to be plain that the processes of nature are not so simple.” 


British Birds, with some Notes in reference to their Plumage. 
Vol. Il. By Cuaupe W. Wyarr, M.B.O.U. Wm. Wesley 
& Son. 


Tue first volume of this beautiful quarto was published in 
1894, and was devoted to the resident British Passerine birds. 
The second volume, now before us, “ contains illustrations of all 
the Passerine Birds which are migrants to the British Islands,— 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 149 


the Occasional Visitors being left out; also of the Resident and 
Migrant Picarie, Striges, Accipitres, and Columbe, the same 
reservation being made to the Occasional Visitors.” Fifty-three 
species are figured, and form subjects for forty-two handsome 
coloured plates. 

The story of our British birds has been told in many ways 
and by many writers. This volume may almost be said to be 
devoted to their iconography. ‘The author seems to have taken 
it for granted that there was not much left to be written about 
his subject, and to have limited himself absolutely to describing 
the plumage and its seasonal vicissitudes. In this course, 
individually, he was probably justified; a good book is not 
necessarily one that exhausts its subject; it should, however, 
completely deal with its selected theme. We must therefore 
refer to the illustrations, and by these the work will be known. 

The plates all bear the initials of the author, and have 
evidently proved a labour of love. Not only have we life-like 
portraits of the birds, but their environment has been sketched 
in no inartistic manner, and we almost seem to recognize some 
of the landscapes which an excellent insular prejudice has made 
us love so well. The homestead behind the Spotted Flycatchers 
is a case in point, while the background to the Tree-Pipit makes 
us almost believe we are at home on the Surrey hills. A sketch 
of the true environment of a bird is no mean hint as to its 
habits, and, in looking over our skins obtained in other lands, a 
mental picture of the scenery where it was procured appears to 
pertain to each specimen. Apart from its value to all lovers of 
our avifauna, it would perhaps be difficult to select a more 
acceptable present to a British naturalist residing abroad than 
this beautiful representation of the well-remembered birds of the 
old country. 


A Manual of Zoology. By the late T. Jerrery Parker, D.Sc., 
F.R.S., and Wini1am A. Hasweut, M.A., D.Sc., F.RB.S. 
Macmillan & Co. Limited. 


In our volume for 1898 (p. 182) we noticed, at such length 
as is available in our pages, ‘A Text-Book of Zoology,’ in two 
volumes, by the above authors. The present publication may be 


150 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


considered a condensation of the previous work, “‘ adapted to the 
requirements of the student in higher classes of schools, and to 
some extent in junior classes of universities.”’ The curtailment 
has been effected ‘‘(1) by leaving out altogether certain classes 
of existing animals; (2) by omitting all descriptions of extinct 
groups; (3) by dealing only very briefly with embryology.” We 
may also accept Prof. Haswell as really the writer of this Manual, 
the death of Prof. Parker having taken place at an initial stage 
of the work. 

Thus we have the essence of a really good book in a convenient 
form for teachers and students, and if the teacher has not also to 
learn his subject from its pages—as is unfortunately sometimes 
the irony of the position—but can really impress its contents on 
his pupils, then this volume should more than hold its own in 
that often undigested superstition that rejoices in the name of 
“science for schools.”’ In these days, when everybody is a 
politician, a military general, and an evolutionist, it is at least 
something that the last position can be fortified by the sound 
zoological axioms obtainable in a small and inexpensive book. 
Not that the last word is said on any subject; and when we read 
that the Amphibia differ “from all fishes but the Dipnoi, in the 
presence of lungs for breathing air in the adult,’ we accept the 
rule, but recur to the exception in ‘“‘ Salamanders with and 
without lungs,” recently noticed in these pages (ante, p. 96). 
Even a specialist may read with the greatest interest the intro- 
ductory remarks as to what constitutes both “genus” and 
“species,” and remember that in the description of the last a 
representative and not an individual is the real specific type. 
It is only fair to say that the authors of this volume do not 
lay down this rule, but the inference may be drawn from their 
definitions. 


The Caroline Islands. By F. W. Curisttan, B.A., &c. 
Methuen & Co. 


Tuer South Sea Islands are still, among naturalists, a name to 
conjure with. In Spanish Micronesia alone, between 139° and 170° 
H. longitude, are scattered a long chain of 652 islands. It was 
in this almost zoologically unknown zone that the once princely 
Hamburg merchant house of Goddeffroy Bros. incited their 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 151 


employés to collect for their museum, and made their commerce a 
friendly helper to Natural History. The firm, we believe, no longer 
exists, but the name of its principals will be long remembered. 
Commerce and zoology are bad partners; they each exact too 
much to flourish together; it seems that one alone can succeed. 
Recently the Sandwich Islands have had their fauna investigated : 
missionaries from time to time collect in the Lotos lands to which 
they are not unoften consigned; huge folios still represent the 
partial work of the old voyagers; but it is probable that much 
more is known of the Ethnology than of the general Zoology 
of these lonely islands, where man alone seems to break the 
peaceful dream of life. 

Mr. Christian has written a good book to lift the veil off the 
Caroline Islands, which he visited rather as a philologist than 
a zoologist, but has still given us incidentally much valuable 
information as to that insular natural history. Thus in the 
appendix we have not only a list of native names for ‘“‘ trees, 
plants, and shrubs,’ but also for ‘‘ fishes, insects, birds, and 
animals ’’ (sic). In the absence of scientific names we cannot of 
course identify the animals to which the local names apply, but 
we are able by his descriptions to form an estimate of the fauna 
and to seek for more precise information. Where the author 
allows himself to theorize he is always interesting—thus: “ It is 
very remarkable the horror in which Micronesians and Polynesians 
alike hold Lizards and Eels, and it certainly seems to point to a 
traditional recollection of the Crocodiles and venomous Serpents 
they left behind them in the great rivers and jungles of Asia and 
the larger islands of Indonesia. What proves this so strongly is 
the fact that Crocodile and Snake names in New Guinea in many 
instances coincide with Lizard and Kel designations current in 
the dialects embracing all the isles of the Pacific.” 

The book is beautifully illustrated, and at p. 125 Mr. Mac- 
pherson will find an account of “ Traps and Cages.” We rise 
from its perusal with a full measure of the vast potentialities 
that exist for a naturalist who could spend a greater part of his 
life on one of these comparatively small islands, investigating 
the fauna as a whole, with a purview beyond both birds and 
Insects, and pass the close of his days in publishing his life’s 
work—one island, one man, one book. 


152 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 


Parr ILI. of ‘The Vertebrate Fauna of Bedfordshire,’ by J. Steele- 
Elliott, has reached us. The publication has hitherto been slow, but the 
author hopes to accelerate it in future. Of the Jay (Garrulus glandarius) 
we read that in northern Bedfordshire this bird is particularly abundant, 
and its depredations noticeable. ‘In Angers Wood during the present 
year (1899) I was particularly struck with the innumerable nests of Black- 
birds and Thrushes, none of which contained eggs, and in all probability 
had been robbed by these ‘ avian birds’-nesters.’ ” 


“Tue Caradoc and Severn Valley Field Club” have issued their 
‘Transactions’ for 1899. In the account of a half-day excursion to Bir- 
mingham, which was principally undertaken to see the collection of British 
Birds in the possession of Mr. R. W. Chase, many interesting jottings will 
be found by the British ornithologist. ‘‘There are three specimens of 
Richard’s Pipit, two of them obtained near Birmingham ; and the only 
specimen of the Siberian Bunting obtained in Britam, taken at Flam- 
borough Head.” 


—_—— 


THE military correspondent of the ‘ Westminster Gazette’ has brought 
the teachings of zoology to the aid of practical warfare. “I have a theory 
on this subject which I should much like to see practically tested. My 
readers will doubtless have noticed that the coats of all animals which 
depend for their existence on their comparative invisibility in their ordinary 
surroundings shade off to a lighter colour—usually white—underneath. I 
believe that, following this hint from Nature, our troops would become 
infinitely less conspicuous if their coats were of the ordinary shade of khaki 
or drab, their breeches somewhat lighter in tone, and their putties or leg- 
gings lighter still. At present, when men are dressed in one uniform tint 
of khaki, the lower limbs, being in shadow, appear very much darker, and 
consequently add to the conspicuousness of the soldier. This will be 
speedily noticeable if the photographs from the seat of war are studied. It 
will then be noticed that in many cases the upper halves of our troops are 
barely distinguishable, but that their lower limbs, much darker than the 
remainder, stand out quite sharply, though the colour of the clothes and the 
colour of the background are in each case the same.” 


THE ZOOLOGIST 


No. 706.—April, 1900. 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH AND THE 
NEIGHBOURHOOD. 


By Arruur PATTERSON. 


Tue aspects of bird-life in the Great Yarmouth district are 
exceedingly interesting, and must have been peculiarly so in the 
earlier part of the century, prior to the improved drainage of the 
marsh-lands, the encroachments of the sportsman, the agriculturist, 
and the builder, the advent of railways, and many other untoward 
circumstances. The Rev. Richard Lubbock, in the introduction 
to his ‘ Fauna of Norfolk,’ truly remarks: ‘‘ We everywhere find 
the spirit of civilization and improvement warring with the fere 
nature.” Ina note written by him in 1847* he says :—‘ Since 
I first began to sport, about 1816, a marvellous alteration has 
taken place in Norfolk, particularly in the marshy parts. When 
first I remember the fens they were full of Terns, Ruffs, and 
Redlegs; and yet the old fenmen declared there was not a tenth 
part of what they remembered when boys. Now these very parts 
which were the best ... are totally drained ...dry as a 
bowling-green, and oats are grown where seven or eight years 
back one hundred and twenty-three Snipes were killed in one day 
by the same gun.” Mr. Southwell goes on to speak of a dry 
pasture pointed out to him by the late Mr. Rising, at Horsey, 


- Vide Lubbock’s ‘ Observations on the Fauna of Norfolk,’ new ed. 1879, 
p. iii, Introduction, by T. Southwell, F'.Z.58. 
Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., April, 1900. M 


154 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


which, in his father’s time, “was a swamp whereon many 
thousands of Black-headed Gulls nested every summer; the 
marshes at that time swarming with Bitterns, Grebes, Ruffs, 
and Avocets.” 

No true naturalist can look upon these gradual but inevitable 
alterations and changes without experiencing feelings of profound 
regret; but, as the needs and gratifications of the many are ever 
superior to the sentiments and delights of the few, the naturalist 
must be content to accept the inevitable. 


Ta ORioae 


A Rove MAP 
T SHEW 
GT YARmovtH 


(AREA) 
Dist rec’ 


A Patterson. Ol. 1697 


As, roughly speaking, a ten-mile radius has been kept to in 
covering the area of the Yarmouth district, Horsey comes within 
the northern boundary. But what may be said of the changes 
apparent there may well apply all round: the marsh-lands sup- 
port herds of cattle where once the waterfowl dotted the swamp, 
dwelling-houses have supplanted furze-bushes, and visitors, other 
than avine, monopolize the sands. 'Thereis, however, no branch 
of natural history which can still be pursued to such advantage 
around Yarmouth as ornithology. It formerly was, and still is, 
without a doubt, one of the richest districts in England for birds 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 155 


of the wading and swimming classes; its easterly position, the 
open, exposed, and varied nature of the locality, with its wealth 
of marsh-land, its spread of waterways, and extensive warrens, 
offer unusual attractions to those species which may be collec- 
tively termed wildfowl. The list which follows will amply sup- 
port this statement. | 

Northwards for many miles stretches an array of sadly 
diminishing sand-hills, or undulating knolls and ridges of blown 
sand, held together by the roots of the marrum grass (Ammo- 
phiia arundinacea), the sand-sedge (Carex arenaria), Ononis 
spinosa, and various other deep-rooting dune-plants interesting 
to the botanist, and in whose seeds, laid bare by the winds of 
autumn, migratory Buntings and Finches find an abundant supply 
of food. In turn these sand-dunes have attractions for the Sand- 
Grouse, the Dotterel, the Great Snipe, and others. 

Nearer the town the sand-hills have been levelled in recent 
years, and are fronted by a sea-wall and macadamized road, 
which extends parallel for some distance to the once celebrated 
North Denes, at one time an extensive area of rounded and 
broken sand-heaps, covered with acres of furze, now extirpated, 
and given over to the golfer. A railway runs through the centre 
of them, and the town keeps slowly creeping northwards beside 
it. Up to the end of the seventies the Whinchat, Stonechat, 
Linnet, Wheatear, and even Partridges nested in the whins; 
the Wood-Pigeon, Turtle-Dove, Stock-Dove, and Mistle-Thrush 
came in flocks in summer to feed here. At Caister and beyond, 
the sand-hills become higher, and the vegetation more varied, 
the brake, broom, and sea-buckthorn being conspicuous; and 
Rabbits abound. The beach below presents a long monotonous 
level of clear firm sand, sparsely ‘shingled ”’ or pebbled, with 
few tide-pools; spring tides cover the sands almost to the sand 
cliffs. Until within the past year or two a few Ringed Plovers 
have persevered in nesting among the higher patches of shingle, 
the site chosen being a depression probably caused by a horse’s 
hoof, the bottom of which is usually lined with small pieces of 
shell or thin white chalky stones. Constant traffic has banished 
this bird, the only species known to have nested there within 
the memory of man. One nest was found on the south beach 
in 1899. 


M2 


156 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


The absence of rocks and seaweeds forbids the abundance 
of certain fishes and Mollusca, so that the ornithologist may 
in some measure infer as to what particular species of birds 
would from choice be usually scarce or abundant. Surface- 
feeders are well represented, but those which dive or prey 
upon Mollusca, and those that delight in rocky and pre- 
cipitous habitats, are generally uncommon, or merely storm- 
driven stragglers. An exception exists in the Scoter, numbers 
of which frequent the Broads all the winter, feeding upon the | 
smaller bivalves which are apparently in spots plentiful at the 
bottom (vide note on Scoter). 

The northern sand-hills mostly slope gradually into marshy 
levels or cultivated fields, reaching their level in the Broad-lands 
and the valley of the Bure. 

Southwards of the town, after passing the mouth of the 
Yare, stretching away towards Lowestoft, is a range of crumbling 
sand-cliffs, the fields above which are cultivated to the very edge. 
A straggling colony of Sand-Martins nests here. All westward of 
the cliffs is cultivated, and merges off into a fairly well-wooded 
district, notably at Fritton and Belton, excepting which scarcely 
anything worthy of that name exists within the limits comprised 
in the district to which these remarks refer. Small thickets 
occur at the margins of some of the Broads, and a few carrs of 
alder and willow, interspersed with birch, are irregularly scattered 
over the swampy parts of the marshes, but seldom covering more 
than an acre or two of ground. 

To the west of the town is the great alluvial flat, once the bed 
of the great estuary known to the Romans as Garienis ostium, and 
up which their galleys passed to their camp at Caistor, beyond 
Norwich. Remains of this estuary and the branches now exist 
in the famous Norfolk Broads, most noticeable of which is 
Breydon Water, into which the Yare, the Waveney, and the Bure 
empty their sluggish streams. 

Before Breydon was walled* and the rivers banked, and the 

* Breydon, five miles long and one in width, is surrounded by a winding 
mound or dyke, faced with jagged flints and backed with grass, forming a 
triangular barrier. The rivers are similarly confined. The ditches formed 
by the soil removed drain the marshes, and are connected with a network of 


others. Steam drainage mills pour the surplus water over into the rivers. 


Hence, although the marshes grow drier year by year, they are always below 
the level of high water. 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 157 


vast stretches of marshes ditched and drained, the extensive level 
of swamp must have been at most hours of the tide a very para- 
dise for the wildfowl, and those who sought them, “It would 
be difficult to imagine,” wrote the Messrs. Paget in 1834, “a 
spot more suitable to their (the wildfowls’) habits than Breydon 
affords, consisting as it does of a sheet of water some miles in 
extent, with shallow borders, or flats (as they are called), and 
surrounded, almost as far as the eye can reach, by marshes. 
The water leaving its banks quite bare for a considerable extent 
at every ebbing of the tide, exposes an abundance of the small 
crustaceous animals and other food most congenial to the Duck 
tribe. Even in the severest winters it is seldom so completely 
frozen over as not still to afford, in the small fish with which it 
abounds, and the crabs and insects about its banks, a sufficiency 
of provision for the fowl; and it is in such seasons that the 
greatest numbers are secured. Almost benumbed with cold, they 
flock together, and while they sit crowded up in a compact mass, 
to prevent the warmth of their bodies escaping, the gunner 
may, in his flat-bottomed boat, approach within a comparatively 
short distance of them by means of channels made in the flats, 
and with a single discharge of his gun, which moves on a 
swivel in the midships of his boat, effect a most extraordinary 
slaughter.” 

To-day these attractions remain much the same, but the birds 
are fewer. In severe spells of frost astonishing numbers of wild- 
fowl are occasionally seen there, when a constant fusillade is 
heard, the frequent sharp crack of shoulder-guns being punc- 
tuated by the louder boom of the punt-guns. During a snap of 
frost in December, 1899, hundreds of Wigeon, Tufted Ducks, 
Mallard, and other fowl, besides thousands of Dunlins, swarmed 
on Breydon; and Durrant’s game-stall presented a remarkable 
appearance, covered as it was with hundreds of wild birds of 
various species. 

Reverting again to the Pagets’ ‘ Sketch,’ an instance is related 
of a punt-gunner, named Thomas, “‘ who one morning, on awaking 
in his boat on the flats, saw not far from him a number of wild- 
fowl sitting in a crowd close together on the ice. From the boat 
being nearly covered with snow he had escaped their observation 
while they were collecting in the night, He immediately fired 


158 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


(his gun carrying about a pound of shot), and with those killed 
outright and the wounded, which he and his dog caught before 
they could make their escape, he secured no fewer than thirty 
couple of wildfowl, consisting principally of Wigeon and Teal.” 
This same old gunner on one occasion, after considerable j 
manceuvring to get within range, killed six Swans out of a flock 
of eight at one shot. 

Mention is also made of a bird-preserver named Harvey (vide 
note on Pratincole), who ‘‘ previous to the alteration in the game- 
laws” sent up to the London markets an average of about fifty 
fowl per week through the season—viz. October to April—the 
number varying with the severity of the weather; thus, in the 
winter of 1829, on one market-day, he had brought to him four | 
hundred wildfowl of various species, five hundred Snipes, and 
one hundred and fifty Golden Plovers, “all of which he imme- 
diately carried up to London and disposed of.”’ 

Notwithstanding the changes which have of late years taken 
place in Breydon—such as the great silting up of the flats (over 
some acres of which now flourish field-like patches of Salicornia 
herbacea, the jointed glass-wort), and the lessening of certain 
species of fish, the Grey Mullet (Mugil capito), for instance, 
which now no longer ascends in shoals, while the Osprey and 
Cormorant are more seldom seen—most interesting glimpses into 
bird-life may be enjoyed. In spring large flocks of Wigeon may 
be observed pulling at the succulent stems of the Potamogeton 
pectinatus (local, “ Wigeon-grass”’), the Curlew boring deep to 
find the Nereid worms, and smaller species of Waders busily 
hunting Gammaride, Mysis vulgaris, and other crustaceans. 
Herons are seldom absent, for the Shore-Crabs (Carcinus menas) 
and the Hels and Flounders have attractions for them. In 
autumn various migrants, the juniors coming first, are often 
abundant, and various Ducks and Geese and Swans may be 
expected in wintry weather. And what adds much to the 
pleasure of a jaunt on Breydon is the possibility that you may 
meet with rare aves at any moment, and your delight will 
certainly not be lessened if your binoculars are handy. I have 
thus fallen in with the Siberian Pectoral Sandpiper, several 
Spoonbills, the Iceland Gull, and many another. 

During the close season Breydon is comparatively quiet, the 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 159 


local gunners having, as arule, respect for the enforcement of the 
Protection Acts by the Breydon Protection Committee, who 
employ a watcher, and with gratifying results. The following 
figures, culled from the rough log-book of ‘“‘ Ducker’”’ Chambers, 
the watcher, which has been kept by him in a most spasmodic 
sort of way for eleven years, will give a fairly good idea of the 
frequency and numbers of spring migrants visiting Breydon on 
their northward journey. Small migrants have been seldom 
noted; of course over such a vast area many birds escape identi- 
fication. A careful and enthusiastic observer might compile a 
vastly superior list both in numbers and species. 


MarcuH-JunNE, 1890. 
March 2nd, 1890. 200 to 300 Wigeon and Mallard. 


we ot, 6G, 65 Shovelers. 

eee, . +55 11 Geese. 

a 0th, ~- 5 300 Wigeon, Golden-eyes ; many small birds. 
May 14th, ,, 60 Godwits, Whimbrel, Plovers. 

PEGE: |- 5 Several Greenshanks and Redshanks. 

Ys ia 6 Cormorants ; several Black Terns. 
June 4th, ,, 4 Shelducks. 

eet, 5, 3 Bernacle-Geese. 


Marcnu-Aveust, 1898. 
March 8rd, 1898. 2 Swans. 


a eAb, 5, 3 Golden-eyes. 
Se OE,” 55 800 Wigeon, Pintails, Shovelers. 
» 10th, ,, © 1000 Wigeon (about). 
April. sth, ,, 1 Spoonbill. 
eeeetGul, > 54 1 Swan. 
May 16th, ,, 700 Godwits; plenty Whimbrel, Plovers, &c. 
ae, 5 2 Goosanders. 
Nth, 5, 2 Spoonbills. 
June 14th, ,, 2 Spoonbills. 
Aug. 12th, ,, 400 Curlews. 


The Broads, although slowly growing up, are still extensive. 
They have a beauty quite their own in their leafy setting of reeds 
and rushes. Of late years the rage for “doing” the Broads has 
banished the privacy and security which at one time characterized 
them. Some nesting species have disappeared, as the Bittern, 
the Godwit, the Black Tern, and the Ruff; whilst among some 
remaining a perceptible decrease is apparent, as in the case of 
the Bearded Tit. Many non-residents have become scarcer, 
although in sharp winters numbers of wildfowl drop in. The 
Crested Grebe fortunately appears to be on the increase, 


160 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


There were at one time several decoys* in use on the various 
Broads, but these have of late years fallen into disuse, and are 
now not worked, with the exception of Sir Savile Crossley’s on 
Fritton Lake. Mr. J. H. Gurney has kindly furnished me with 
the following extract from the many years’ returns for this decoy 
in his possession :— 


TAKE OF WILDFOWL AT F'RITTON DEcoy. 


Duck. Teal. | Wigeon. | Shoveler. 


Oetober,: | TSS hasp-cr an 41 17 0 0 
INGVEIMDOr; 5, escent 198 14 0 0 
December, +25; aersaceas 176 2 0 1 
January, 1888......... 121 2 2 0 
Hebruary,, 5. ss<aunes 133 0 0 0 
March, seals Cucneeee 6 iJ 5 0 

675 66 7 1 


I have an entry from the ‘ Yarmouth Independent,’ of a con- 
temporary date, stating that on Dec. 15th, 1879, the decoymen 
at Fritton secured no fewer than 190 wildfowl at one pull of 
the net! 

The following agreement for the hiring of a decoy, the very 
site of which appears now to have become lost, will serve to 
show how remunerative at one time these engines of destruction 
must have been :— 


‘‘Memorandum of an Agreement made this 17th day of March, 1810, 
between Mrs. Hannah Forder, of Rollesby, Norfolk, and her son Thomas 
Forder, have agreed with his mother for the use of a decoy now in her 
possession, from Lady-day next following it, at the Annual Rent £44 per 
year, and the said Thomas Forder shall at his own expense keep the same in 
tenantable repair ; the rent to be paid half-yearly. 

‘‘And a further agreement between Thomas and his mother Hannah 
Forder for all fowles and fish he can catch. The said Thomas Forder do 
agree to deliver the same fowl at eighteen pence per couple, and half-fowl at 
half-price, and from August to Michaelmas at two shillings per couple, and 
half-fowl at half-price, and from Michaelmas to Lady-day at three shillings 
per couple, and half-fowl at half-price. 


* For most interesting and graphic accounts of decoys and the methods 
of working them, see Stevenson’s ‘ Birds of Norfolk,’ and Lubbock’s § Obser- 
vations on the Fauna of Norfolk,’ new edit. 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 161 


** Also all Pike under three Qurters [quarters ?] sixpence each, and Hels 


at three shillings per stone. 
‘“*FHANNAH ForpDER, her mark x. 


‘‘THomAS FoRDER. his mark x.” 
se {Sebn Son. Jnr. 

The taking of eggs was at one time carried on to a great 
extent, and tended undoubtedly to the diminution of certain 
species. ‘All the marshes,” wrote the Messrs. Paget in 1834, 
“but more especially about Oby, Thurne, and Acle, are found 
considerably profitable, by the numbers of Plovers’ eggs which 
may be collected in them, and of which there is carried on.a most 
extensive sale during the months of March, April,and May. The 
' same person (Isaac Harvey) before mentioned sends an average 
of between six and seven hundred eggs to the London and other 
markets every week during the season.” The ‘‘ eggs” covered a 
variety of species, e.g. Snipe, Lapwings’, Redshanks’, Water- 
Rails’, Moor-hens’, and Coots’. At the present time a few small 
chip trays of Plovers’ eggs appear in Yarmouth market every 
spring, but, as with the wildfowl, there is but a limited local sale. 

There are many features connected with the bird-life of the 
neighbourhood which are worthy of note, among them the 
extreme uncertainty of migratory movements in large bodies. In 
some years certain rare species have appeared in unusual num- 
bers, as in the case of the Shore Lark, Lapland Bunting, Little 
Auk, Buzzards, Skuas, and others; on the other hand, years 
may elapse without such records. These fluctuations undoubtedly 
depend upon, or are affected by, atmospheric conditions; 2 sharp 
winter, with continuous occurrences of heavy gales from the 
north, north-east, or south-east, will drive in many species, more 
particularly during the periods of migration. In October the 
local ornithologist hails with pleasure a south-easterly breeze, 
with ‘‘dirty weather” in its wake. The day previous certain 
species will be perhaps altogether absent; at night, as the wind 
freshens or the drizzling rain makes the darkness dismal, he 
may hear their clamorous call-notes resounding overhead ; the 
bewildered birds, unaccustomed to the glare of our gas-lamps, 
keep wheeling around, as if attracted by them, incessantly calling 
in order to keep together their respective flocks, until the day 
dawns, when they drop upon the Breydon mud-flats to feed and 


162 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


rest, or pursue their journey. Thus the Golden Plover, the 
Knot, and many others are often to be met with a few hours after 
a shift of wind. The following ‘ entry” from my note-book is a 
case in point :— 

Sept. 30th, 1899.—Wind veered yesterday from south-west to 
south-east. Rough wet night. To-day Breydon was noisy with 
birds; saw some Turnstones and Whimbrel; number of Grey 
Plovers, some Greenshanks, and many small birds. Many scores 
of Grey Plovers were subsequently shot. 

A similar occurrence is noted for September, 1897, as 
follows :— 

Sept. 5th.—A “rush” of migratorial birds; wind suddenly 
veering to east after continuous west and south-west winds. 
Next day, Sept. 6th, on a game-stall, the following birds were 
exposed for sale :—Ten Godwits, one Shelduck, one Scaup, nine 
Curlew Sandpipers, one Reeve, one Greenshank, twenty Knots, 
two Kingfishers. | 

That the movements of certain birds are a fairly reliable 
indication that some atmospheric disturbance is approaching 
seems to my mind beyond dispute. Note the following entries :— 

Nov. 28rd, 1897.—Extraordinary thick fog. 

Nov. 24th.—Night noisy with cries of Plovers; this, with 
certain other birds being “uneasy,” portending bad weather. 
(The weather changed almost immediately after.) 

Nov. 28th.—Blew hard to-day (and next), the gale causing 
havoc all round the neighbourhood. ‘Tide rose to an alarming 
height. The sea broke through the sand-hills at Horsey. 

South-east winds are more favourable to the migratorial birds 
passing along our shores, whilst that from an opposite quarter, 
or from a westerly direction, will favour the Dutch coast-line, to 
the detriment of our own. With light north-west winds and 
moonlight nights, during October and November, the Woodcock 
is anxiously looked for. Westerly winds have been responsible 
for the visits of a few American wanderers—for instance, the 
Great Spotted Cuckoo. Severe winters, with much snow, drive 
numerous wanderers south, and there can be little doubt that 
many birds which rush ahead of hard weather have put off their 
exit until absolutely driven to it. In the cruel J anuary of 1881, 
the day before the fearfully disastrous gale on our coast, I wit- 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 163 


nessed an extraordinary immigration of small birds, amongst 
them many Twurdide, besides Redpolls and other Finches, many 
of which fell exhausted on landing, some taking shelter in wheel- 
ruts in the sand. The chirp of a Sparrow particularly caught my 
attention, and Passer domesticus was distinguished as he flew by. 
Redbreasts were also noted. On Feb. 2nd, 1897, Fieldfares and 
Redwings were arriving in continuous flocks, as if it were an 
ordinary October migration. On the 3rd Larks were trooping 
in. Coarse winterly weather followed them. On Dec. 22nd, 
1894, hundreds of Lapwings were coming over against a strong 
north-west gale. Many were drowned. 

As to birds which fall exhausted in the sea and are drowned, 
there can be little doubt that numbers, especially of the smaller 
species—e. g. Chaffinches, Redpolls, and many others—perish in 
this way when overtaken by stress of weather; but few are seen 
washed up onthe beach. Their disappearance may be accounted 
for by the presence at this time of numerous Gulls on the coast, 
which are eager to glean up any such flotsam that is almost sure 
to attract their notice as they ceaselessly patrol the restless sea. 
A sudden change of wind to an easterly point will sometimes 
drive a few of these unfortunate birds ashore. On Sept. 24th, 
1881, during a walk along the north beach, I observed lying 
among the refuse three Common Buzzards, three Sparrowhawks, 
and a Harrier, which, with a few common species, had been over- 
taken by a storm and had perished. There had been that month 
an unusual immigration of raptorial birds, several others having 
met with an untimely end in the neighbourhood. I have also 
found in the wash and at the tide-mark at various times Guille- 
mots, Razorbills, Crows, Merlins, and many others that have 
succumbed to fatigue or the violence of the storm. On one 
occasion I found the remains of quite a number of Kittiwakes 
(vide note on Kittiwake). When stranded these carcases are 
very soon stripped by Hooded Crows, which do not scruple to 
dine even off defunct members of their own genus. 

In some years it is extremely interesting to watch the steady 
influx of migrants of various species, often indicative, to my mind, 
of a long and severe winter ensuing. At other times migration 
goes on scantily or spasmodically. It was my custom for several 
years, when living at the north part of the town, to watch these 


164 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


movements, more especially in October, keeping much to the 
beach and vicinity of the North Denes.* Amongst many observa- 
tions made, the following few may be of interest :—I noticed that 
Larks were our commonest immigrants. Before daybreak their 
call-note might be heard as they “struck” shore. As light 
dawned they might be seen skimming shorewards just above the 
waves; as the day wore on they gradually flew higher, till some- 
times a great altitude was obtained by succeeding flocks. Larks 
usually fly in from direct east. Fieldfares and Redwings gener- 
ally arrived from north-east. Rooks and Hooded Crows at 
ordinary times leisurely trooped in, flying east to west. Occa- 
sionally ‘‘rushes” of these Corvide, more particularly Rooks, 
strike the coast farther north, and lead along, in quick succeeding 
flocks, the line of trees bordering Caister road. Small birds 
usually do the same, Linnets, Twites, and such like keeping 
more to the cliffs and sand-hills, in which line of flight the bird- 
catchers fix their nets. Jackdaws often mix with other corvine im- 
migrants, and invariably are noisy, except when with the “‘rushes” 
referred to. My experience leads me to believe that by the first 
week in November the majority of immigrants have arrived, and 
not till the first spell of severe weather sets in does another 
movement take place, and that November generally is our dullest 
local bird-month. Lightship men, who formerly captured many 
tired migrants on board, complain of a falling off in late years. 

The autumn arrivals of 1899 were scanty, beyond the fairly 
regular incoming of Rooks, Hooded Crows, and Larks. But 
early in December the weather set in cold, with wind at south- 
east. On the night of the 6th it was squally; the air was 
“alive” with cries of Golden Plover, which were plentiful on the 
marshes on the 8th. Snow fell on the 10th, with sharp frost 
ensuing. Snipe, which had hitherto been scarce, ‘‘ inrushed ” to 
the brackish ditches on the marsh-lands, Common and Jacks 
being shot in unusual numbers. I believe this abundance was, 
in Norfolk at least, universal. On a local game-stall I saw the 
following numbers of Snipe :— 

Dec. 11th.—47 Common Snipe, 17 Jack-Snipe. 

Dec. 12th.—(Almost identical numbers.) 


* My spare time and many nights are now spent on Breydon, to and 
from, and in my houseboat. 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 165 


Dec. 18th.—120 Common Snipe, 20 Jack-Snipe, 8 Woodcocks. 

Dec. 14th.—Total Snipe on this date, 43. 

Dec. 15th.—Did not obtain numbers on this date. 

Dec. 16th.—Total Snipe, 310. 

Thus, allowing an average of fifty Snipe on each of the dates 
missing, the week’s record was something like 650 birds. 

After the 16th numbers fell off almost to nil. Many other 
birds accompanied this inrush; Breydon and the Broads became 
alive with them. Hundreds of Dunlins and many scores of 
various Ducks were shot, only a portion of those killed locally 
being exposed for sale at this gamedealer’s stall. Mr. Durrant, 
the proprietor, kindly furnished me with a complete list of birds 
brought up on the 16th, which is appended :— 


Wildfowl on Game-stall, Dec. 16th, 1899. 


336 Dunlins. 1 Goosander. 
20 Coots. 80 Blackbirds. 
6 Dabchicks. 1 Curlew. 
12 Water-Rails. 82 Duck and Mallard. 
3 Golden Plovers. 90 Half-fowl (being about 
1 Heron. equally divided between 
30 Larks. Tufted Ducks, Wigeon, 
310 Snipe. and Pochards). 
10 Moor-hens. 3 Teal. 
26 Lapwings. 3 Golden-eyes. 


Besides these there were hundreds of Blackbirds and Thrushes, 
and many wildfowl scattered al! over the Saturday’s market. 
From a wildfowler’s point of view the above one day’s figures 
compare favourably with a week’s list givenin Stevenson’s ‘ Birds 
of Norfolk’ (vol. iii. p. 175), which it will be interesting to 
subjoin :— 
Wildfowl, Waders, éc., recewed from Dec. 14th to 21st, 1878. 


447 Full Snipe. 2 Curlews. 

21 Jack-Snipe. 4 Herons. 
206 Green and Golden Plover 3 Kingfishers. 

3 Grey Plover. 35 Teal. 

14 Woodcocks. 147 Golden-eyes and other fowl. 
41 Waterhens. 421 Duck and Mallard (220 from 

2 Rails. decoy). 

17 Water-Rails. 1 Great Plover. 

43 Coots. 1 EKared Grebe. 
133 Stints. 2 Rough-legged Buzzards. 

13 Owls. 2 Smew (male and female). 

4 Hawks (various). 29 Sundries. 

9 Grebes. Total, 1600. 


Another week’s fowl is also enumerated with a total of 1107 


166 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


birds, a note of explanation stating that the ‘‘ Golden-eyes ” 
(which is a common Norfolk gunner’s name for them) were 
mostly Tufted Ducks. Of a total of twenty-two Grebes for the 
fortnight three were Dabchicks, one “ EKared” (probably Sla- 
vonian), the remaining eighteen being Crested Grebes. 

There is at the present time at Yarmouth but one dealer in 
wildfowl, Mr. Durrant, whose stall is in the market-place; and 
many thousands of birds, rare and. common, have passed through 
his hands. His birds are received from the immediate locality, 
and from the country districts around, the smailer common 
species hanging in bunches, the larger ones singly from hooks. 
Rarer examples are promoted to a more conspicuous position 
upon a fruit-tray. This stall is a fairly accurate gauge as to 
what species are at any given time abundant, or are arriving. 
Durrant himself is full of anecdote. On one occasion he assured 
me that during some sharp weather he had brought to him in 
one day over 1100 Common or “full” Snipe, for which he paid 
during the greater part of the day sixpence apiece. Of these he 
forwarded two five-hundred lots to London dealers, receiving in 
the course of a day or two in return a remittance to the value of 
one penny each, accompanied by a polite note to the effect that 
‘small cargoes were coming over from Holland ” with other wild- 
fowl. In the severe winter of 1890-91 Durrant had a large 
supply of birds. I was fortunate enough to peep into his 
market-book on Nov. 29th, 1890, on which date were recorded 
the following as received :— 


Nov. 29th, 1890. 


1 Bittern. 110 Common Snipe. 
240 Dunlins. 2 Bewick’s Swans. 
9 Knots. 1 Pintail. 
11 Woodcocks. 3 Curlews. 
47 Duck and Mallard. 14 Jack-Snipe. 
52 Blackbirds and Thrushes. Golden-eyes (several). 
1 Godwit. 39 Larks. 


14 Plovers (various). 


As this was an exceptionally busy year with him, I kept a 
record, usually counting the birds myself, publishing the same 
in the ‘ Kastern Daily Press.’ The following two examples will 
suffice :— 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 167 


Dec. 6th, 1890. 


Tufted Ducks (several). 5 Golden-eyes. 
Duck and Mallard (several). Pochard and Wigeon (several). 
1 White-fronted Goose. Moor-hens and Coots (several). 
Snipe (several). 1 Red-throated Diver. 
1 Goosander. 2 Curlews. 
Snipe (number). 12 Water-Rails. 
3 Bewick’s Swans. 3 Dabchicks. 
(making 5 for week). 2 Short-eared Owls. 
3 Barn Owls. 1 Kestrel. 


Small birds (many). 
Dec. 20th, 1890. 


1 Bewick’s Swan. 1 Red-throated Diver. 
23 Scaups. 1 Redshank. 
9 Wigeon. 16 Pochards. 
2, Goosanders. 1 Shoveler. 
17 Woodcocks. 2, Teal; 
2, White-fronted Geese. 36 Knots. 
20 Tufted Ducks. Many small birds. 
1 Shelduck. 


It goes without saying that rare species soon change hands, 
the bulk of the commoner kinds going in hampers at night to 
Leadenhall Market. 

Up to within recent years local gunners, except in the case of 
isolated intelligent sportsmen-naturalists, were so eager to shoot 
birds en gros, and were so ready to turn their victims into pence, 
that many rarities without doubt escaped notice, and were con- 
signed to the cuisine. Many a scarce Sandpiper has been strung 
together with a parcel of Dunlins, and so spoiled for a specimen. 
On Sept. 8th, 1881, a gunner killed six Little Stints (Tringa 
minuta), and, taking them home, cooked them, ascertaining their 
identity almost immediately afterwards. It is on record that 
Lilly Wigg, an old-time Yarmouth naturalist, cooked and ate a 
Red-breasted Goose (Bernicla rujicollis), and did not even guess 
as to its species until the feathers afterwards attracted his 
attention. 

During the first invasion of Pallas’s Sand Grouse, a local 
gunner shot an example on the North Denes, taking it to a 
dealer named Watson (who in his day received many a rara avis), 
who gave him half-a-crown for it; one long tail-feather had been 
shot away. Watson offered him another half-crown if he would 
find the missing one, which he did. Another rural sportsman 
emptied a bag of common birds on a dealer’s stall some years 
ago, “ throwing in”’ a specimen he did not know, and so did not 
value it. It proved to be a Buff-backed Heron. 


168 THE ZOOLOGIST, 


But to-day all the gunners are on the alert, as are the bird- 
catchers,* who, on securing a bird that in any degree differs from 
any they have before possessed, are careful to have an identification 
before disposing of it. In this way some rare Finches and other 
small birds have been detected, as the Serin Finch, Tawny Pipit, 
Scarlet Bullfinch, and others. The Warblers and other small 
Passeres were for long deemed scarcely significant enough for 
the attention of local observers. Unfortunately for themselves, 
their small size, agility of movement, and similarity of charac- 
teristics make their identification on the wing almost a matter of 
impossibility. Hence the growing inclination to shoot every 
unusually attired little stranger. 

Of late years bird-value has been greatly enhanced by the 
eagerness for collecting specimens. Prices paid for local rarities 
have at times been very high. At the sale of the late Mr. 
Rising’s collection of authenticated birds at Horsey, the following 
prices were realized :— 


White-winged Black Tern . ; ; . 12 guineas. 
Brown Snipe : : ; : + ie - 
Red-breasted Pochard : : : , . Bie 
Buffel-headed Duck  . ‘ ; : «| 25 - 
Spoonbills, f and? . , ‘ , » oe “: 
Hoopoes, g and 2 : : ; ‘ - ee ea 


Before closing this introductory chapter, it remains to enume- 
rate the names of several local men who have been conspicuous 
as ornithologists, sportsmen, and collectors. 

In the earlier part of the century lived Charles Stuart Girdle- 
stone, ‘‘whose union,” say the Messrs. Paget, ‘“‘of first-rate 
sporting accomplishments with the greatest ardour in the pursuit, 
gave him advantages which none here have since equalled.” His 
birds passed into the hands of Mrs. Charles Baker, and have 
since been scattered. A Jack-Snipe was believed to be the only 
existing specimen, but Mr. B. Dye has a Stilt Plover, undoubtedly 
the same referred to by the Pagets as having been shot on the 
North River, which he purchased at the sale of the late Town 
Clerk, 'T. M. Baker’s, effects. A Fork-tailed Petrel from the 
same collection is in the Yarmouth Tolhouse Museum. Lilly 
Wigg, who immortalized the Red-breasted Goose by eating it, 


* The only net used by the few local birdcatchers is the clap-net. 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 169 


is stated by the Pagets to have bought a Harlequin Duck* in the 
market, but recent naturalists do not think the occurrence 
sufficiently well established to entitle the species to a place in 
the list of Norfolk birds; and the same applies to the King- 
Hidert said to have been obtained by the same person. ‘T'his 
species has been, however, identified from another part of the 
coast. 

Mr. John Youell was “a great bird man”; his collection 
contained some choice specimens. He is mentioned by the 
Messrs. Pagets as having afforded considerable assistance in the 
compilation of their lists. 

The Rev. C. Steward, Rector of Caister, whose name will 
remain associated with the first and for many years the only 
British-killed example of Steller’'s Duck (Somateria stellert), 
presented to the Norwich Museum his collection of over a 
hundred specimens, including this Duck, a Purple Heron, and a 
Caspian Tern. 

Mr. C. A. Preston obtained one of the earliest recorded 
Ferruginous Ducks (F'uligula nyroca), which was shot close by 
Giber’s mill on the South Breydon wall, and which he sub- 
mitted, when identified, to Paget, after whom the hybrid between 
this species and the Pochard has been designated—the Pagets’ 
Pochard. 

A Yarmouth grocer named Luciaj is mentioned as having 
been a familiar figure on Yarmouth beach, ‘‘ where, gun in hand, 
he used to be a terror to the Gulls,” of which he appears to have 
had a fine representative collection of species in their various 
stages of plumage. 

John Smith,§ Librarian at Yarmouth, also collected and kept 
records, but ‘‘ has left but faint traces of his favourite pursuit.” 

Stephen Miller’s collection contained many choice birds, 
which were sold in 1853. ‘There were seventy-four lots, and 
amongst them were the Buffel-headed and Red-crested Ducks.|| 
They produced what we should now consider very low prices— 


* Vide Stevenson’s ‘ Birds of Norfolk,’ footnote in vol. iii. p. 219. 
+ Ibid. pp. 192, 384. 
{ Vide Trans. Norf. and Nor. Nat. Soc. vol. vi. p. 82. 
§ Ibid p. 81. 
|| Catalogue of Birds in the Collection of Mr. Connop. 
4ool, 4th ser. vol. IV., April, 1400. N 


170 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


the rage for collecting had not then set in; but some of these 
birds, sold thirty years after at Mr. Rising’s sale, produced the 
very high prices already mentioned. 

Amongst other names associated with those “ halcyon days ” 
may be mentioned Frederick Frere, Henry Teasdel, John Daw- 
son Turner, Joseph Tomlinson, J. G. Overend, and Robert 
Rising of Horsey. Mr. Overend’s very representative collection 
was dispersed in June, 1876. ‘There were ninety-six uncased 
lots, numbering one hundred and eighty specimens, which 
fetched ridiculously low prices. Mr. Rising’s birds were sold 
at Horsey, September, 1885. There were one hundred and forty- 
two lots of well-authenticated birds, which realized about £340, 
several of the best of them ultimately going to the Norwich 
Museum and to the Connop collection. 

Among local collections at the present time stands promi- 
nently that of Mr. E. M. Connop, of Rollesby Hall, which at the 
time of cataloguing by Mr. T. Southwell a few months since 
consisted of 434 cases, containing 336 species of birds; and 
among them may be mentioned Overend’s White Stork, Great 
Spotted Cuckoo, Black Stork, Greater Shearwater, Yellow-legged 
Gull, Little Bustard, and many others. 

Mr. Fielding Harmer has choice birds, comprising a fine 
series of Breydon-killed Spoonbills, and several of the rarer 
Waders in nuptial attire, all obtained by him prior to the advent 
of the Bird Protection Acts. Mr. Bellin, Sen., has a locally killed 
Gull-billed Tern, Caspian Tern, and other rare Terns. Mr. B. 
Dye, a blind baker ornithologist, still collects, and is the proud 
possessor of a fine female Spoonbill with a grand crest, the 
Pectoral Sandpiper, White-winged Tern, Fork-tailed Petrel, and 
a number of others; several of them were preserved by himself 
before his eyesight failed him. Nothing more delights him now 
than being left to identify any bird placed in his hands by feeling 
it. Mr. EK. C. Saunders, who collects as well as preserves his 
own specimens, has had, ameng others killed in this neighbour- 
hood, Norfolk Plovers, Black-throated Diver, Montagu’s Harrier, 
Solitary Snipes, and others. Mr. G. Smith’s name is associated 
with the first recorded examples of the Tawny Pipit, the White 
Wagtail, the Mediterranean Black-headed and Iceland Gulls 
and the Greater Shearwater, mention of which, with other rare 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 171 


occurrences, have been made at various times in the ‘ The 
Zoologist. Mr. G. F. D. Preston has a grand Red-necked 
Phalarope in full summer plumage, and was the first to call 
attention to the increasing numbers of the Shore Lark visiting 
this locality, himself shooting several in 1876. He is the last of 
a family of local ornithologists of that name. The late Mr. E. 
IT. Booth shot many of the choicest of his specimens, contained 
in the celebrated Brighton Museum, on Breydon, and on the sea 
off Yarmouth. Mr. W. Lowne, of Fuller’s Hill, Yarmouth, 
taxidermist, should also be mentioned, as many of the rare birds 
noted in the subjoined list have passed through his hands, as 
have many in the county collections, noteworthy amongst them 
being Sabine’s Gull (1881), White-tailed Eagle (1882), Manx 
Shearwater (1883), Roller (1888), Pallas’s Sand Grouse (1888), 
Little Bustard (1889), Iceland Gull (1899), &. Mr. H. C. 
~Clark, of George Street, is the only other professional local 
birdstuffer. 

The writer of these notes neither shoots nor collects, but has 
used eyes and field-glasses, and kept records of rare and inter- 
esting occurrences in local natural history for more than twenty 
years; and has helped in a small degree to found the Tolhouse 
Museum, which contains a number of cases of interesting birds. 


The principal works relating to Yarmouth birds areas follow: 

‘An Account of the Birds found in Norfolk.’ By Sir Thomas 
Browne, but not published till after his death in 1682. [Wilkin’s 
Edition of his Works, vol. iv. pp. 3138-324 (1835).] 

*“A Catalogue of Norfolk and Suffolk Birds, with Remarks.” 
By the Rev. R. Sheppard and the Rev. W. Whitear. (‘ Trans- 
actions’ of the Linnean Society, vol. xv. pp. 1-62, 1826.] 

‘Sketch of the Natural History of Yarmouth.’ By C. J. and 
James (the late Sir James) Paget. [1834.] 

‘Observations on the Fauna of Norfolk.’ By the Rev. R. 
Lubbock. [1845.] (A new edition, with additions from unpub- 
lished manuscripts of the author, and notes by ‘I’. Southwell, 
was published in 1879.) 

“An Account of the Birds found in Norfolk,” &¢. By 
Messrs. J. H. Gurney and W. R. Fisher. [Published in ‘ The 


Zoologist’ (1846, pp. 1800, 1373).] 
N 2 


172 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


‘The Birds of Norfolk. With Remarks on their Habits, 
Migration, and Local Distribution.’ 38 vols. By Henry Steven- 
son, F.L.S. [Vol.i. ii. published 1866 and 1870; vol. iii. being 
continued and completed by Mr. T. Southwell in 1890.] 

‘A List of all the Birds shot on Breydon Water up to 1890.” 
By Mr. F. Harmer in P. H. Emerson’s ‘ Wild Life on a Tidal 
Water.’ 

‘ Catalogue of the Birds of Suffolk,’ &c. By the Rev. Churchill 
Babington. [Published 1884-86; contains much valuable matter 
relating to Yarmouth and Lowestoft.] 

‘Transactions’ of the Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists’ 
Society, published yearly [1869-1899], contain many local re- 
ferences. 

The pages of ‘The Zoologist,’ founded and first edited by 
HKdward Newman in 1843, are a perfect epitome of Norfolk 
zoology, having been the recognized medium for such records 
since its commencement to the present time. Annual “ Ornitho- 
logical Notes” in this Journal by Mr. J. H. Gurney include many 
local items forwarded to him by local observers during the last 
twenty years. 


In conclusion, my best thanks are tendered to Messrs. J. H. 
Gurney and T. Southwell for assistance kindly rendered ; and to 
Messrs. Durrant, Dye, Lowne, Preston, and Saunders for several 
dates of interesting occurrences with which they have supplied me. 


(To be continued.) 


( 178) 


AN OBSERVATIONAL DIARY OF THE HABITS OF 
THE GREAT PLOVER (GDICNEMUS CREPI- 
TANS) DURING SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER. 


By Epmunp SE.ovs. 


THE Great or Norfolk Plover being not yet exterminated in 
East Anglia, I spent some time during last September and 
October in observing its habits. 

A thick belt of bracken fringes on one side a barren area of 
sand scantily clothed with lichen or moss, or with some very 
close dry herbage, which (if not the lichen itself) is browsed on 
by Rabbits. In other parts it is bounded by a tangle of very 
long thin wiry grass, or by some stunted and sorry-looking 
heather, clinging amidst sand and flints. Beyond, on one side, 
is the river; on the other a piece of open moorland, which the 
bracken also fringes on one side, whilst the road skirts it on 
another. I had seen the Plover on this sandy waste (which 
I here call the amphitheatre or plateau), and thought the 
bracken might give me the means of getting closer to them than 
I had before been able to do. 

The following notes were made almost always on the spot, 
sometimes whilst the actions noted were proceeding, usually just 
after. They were copied out, and sometimes a little elaborated 
or added to on my return home the same evening. If occasion- 
ally I put down something after a longer interval of time, I had 
always kept it quite fresh in my memory. 

September 1st, 1899.—Crept up through the bracken to j abe 
of open space between 5 and 6 p.m., and found myself close to a 
number of the Great Plover. They, however, shortly took alarm 
from the moving of the fronds, and flew farther off, but to no 
great distance for the glasses. Some three or four birds 
remained quite near. The birds that had flown off were joined 
by others, and at last by a flock of ten. They may then have 
amounted to some fifty in all; and stood stretched out in a long 


174 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


straggling line, ganglion-like in form, swelling out into knots 
where the birds were grouped more thickly, with thinner spaces 
between. Watched them mostly through the glasses. Charac- 
teristic actions were preening feathers of the breast and wings. 
The latter they stretch out, and then, twisting the neck to one or 
the other side, passed the primary quill-feathers, as it seemed to 
me, through the beak. Another—one of the birds near me—laid 
one side of the head on the ground so that I could see the eye of 
the other side staring up. This I observed for the first time. 
The reason I do not know. Thought at time it was to rub the 
head, but, as I have often seen them scratch their heads with one 
foot most neatly and effectively—as indeed do all birds—this 
would seem superfluous, and moreover it kept the head still. 
Whilst watching the main body of birds I observed one make 
several sudden little impetuous runs in different directions, 
beating and striking about with its wings. There was excite- 
ment, but the actions seemed to have no reference to the other 
birds (as of display), who seemed quite indifferent. The line 
was long and in general very straggling, and this particular bird 
was not in any close proximity to others, but rather segregated. 
One of the birds that had remained after the others flew off 
now came very near, so that—still using the glasses—I observed, 
as he made one of the little quick characteristic runs forward 
(suggestive of a Thrush on the lawn), the object which occasioned 
it—a delicate white thing in the air, which I took to be a small 
thistle-down. This he secured and ate, and I imagined that his 
peckings at it after it was in his possession were to disengage the 
seed from the down. Almost immediately afterwards, however, 
a small brown moth came into the field of view, flying low over 
the belt of dry bushy grass where the bird was. Instantly the 
bird (who seemed to catch sight of the moth about the same time 
as I did) started in pursuit, with the same rapid run and head 
stretched out. He got up to the moth and essayed to catch it, 
pecking at it in a very peculiar way, not excitedly or wildly, but 
with little precise pecks, the head closely and guardedly following 
the moth’s motions, the whole strongly suggestive of professional 
skill. The moth eluded him, however, and the bird stopped 
rigidly, having apparently lost sight of it. Shortly afterwards, 
when the moth had gone some way, he caught sight of it again, 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 175 


and made another quick run in pursuit, coming up again, and 
again making his quick little pecks, but unsuccessfully as before. 
There was tnen the same pause followed by the same run, then a 
close near chase, and finally the moth was caught and eaten. 
What I had taken for a small thistle-down had been probably 
therefore (though the other is possible) a small white moth. It 
was quite a distance from where the bird first sighted the moth to 
where he finally caught it. In another chase, the object of which 
I was unable to see (twilight coming on), the same bird, at the 
end of a run, made a straight-up jump into the air (missing it, I 
think). This latter action I have not observed before, but the 
quick eager runs with sudden start-stops between—the head 
thrust eagerly forward—were so exactly the habitual actions of 
these birds (as I have often watched them at a greater or less 
distance through the glasses) that I now feel sure they are usually 
pursuing low-flying moths or other insects at such times. I had 
before often connected these actions with something on the 
gsround—imagining a fresh object for each run—and had won- 
dered both at the eyesight of the bird and its apparent want of 
interest when it got to the spot. Aerial game had not occurred 
to me. 

Later, another of the few birds near me kept running about 
at short intervals in an excited manner, waving or rather flinging 
its wings about in a tumultuous manner. 

Another one, quite close (but now getting dark), seemed much 
occupied in probing or picking up something from the ground; 
but all at once it also made a run forward, throwing about its 
Wings, and did so several times: afterwards in a way which 
suggested a relation between this and its search for food on the 
ground, or whatever else the actions suggesting such search may 
have really been. (Query. Did it attempt to beat down a low- 
flying moth with its wings? But the one that caught two moths 
—and this was very likely the same bird—made no such attempt, 
nor did the action suggest that at all forcibly.) In the two other 
birds this excited running about and beating of the wings sug- 
gested anything rather than a part of any process of food-getting. 
I incline to think that the ground probing or pecking action has 
some other meaning. Their sad wailing cry uttered all about by 
the birds whilst on the ground, as also whilst flying. 


176 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


September 4th.—Got to same place about 6 p.m., and counted. 
fifty-one birds standing or sitting about within the limits of the 
sandy amphitheatre in a scattered proximity. Watching through 
the glasses, I saw one bird advance quickly towards another (com- | 
batively, as I thought), and, when just in front of it, wave and 
flourish with its wings. Then, however, the same bird, turning, 
moved a step or two away from the one it had seemed to 
challenge,* and crouched on the ground in a manner not at all 
suggestive of combative inclinations.t Shortly afterwards either 
this same or another bird (but I think the same one) ran pug- 
naciously at another, and both then stood with outstretched wings 
and heads craned forwards (the tips of the beaks seeming almost 
to touch each other), apparently on the point of engaging in 
combat. They did not do so, however, but in a moment or so 
paced away from each other, and stood indifferent. 

As it grew towards twilight I again noticed the sudden little 
rushings of the birds, accompanied with wavings of the wings, 
and this became much more frequent as the twilight deepened. 
At length, by fits and starts—now one and now another, so that 
there were generally several at a time in different parts of the 
amphitheatre—the whole troop of birds were thus occupied, and 
it became an interesting spectacle. I watched as long as I could 
through the glasses, and, when no longer able to use them, very 
luckily two birds came quite near me, so that, although now semi- 
dark, I could see them well with the naked eye. Watching the 
whole time as closely as possible, I endeavoured to make out the. 
meaning of this wing-waving, and it appeared to me that it was 
in connection with the chase of flying insects, sometimes (as I 
observed and feel sure about) in aid of a jump into the air after 
one, at other times owing, as it seemed, to excitement merely— 
the excitement (and I think the social excitement) of the chase. 
But that it occurred in and as a part of the pursuit of game 
(insects) I could not doubt after what I had seen three nights ago. 
T noted that when one bird ran and waved his wings another 


* The actions of the challenged bird I did not note at the time, and 
cannot recall, though I think they were similar. Do what one will, a certain 
amount will be seen and forgotten, or but dimly recalled. 

} The bird appeared to me to elevate the tail and posterior part of the 
body generally, 


HABITS F THE GREAT PLOVER. 177 


would often run quickly up to him, also waving them, and join in 
the pursuit. Had I not seen the chase of the moths alluded to I 
should have thought this action either bellicose or a joining or 
rivalry in display, though I am sure I should not. have felt 
satisfied with either theory. Now I can have no doubt that it 
was simply the desire of one bird to get what another was 
chasing—as with fowls, ducks, &c. 

To sum up what occurs to me from this and the previous 
day’s observation. 

lst. The extension, waving, beating about, &c., of the wings 
—whilst not in flight—is an accustomed action of these birds, 
indulged in on various occasions, and ready to leap out under 
excitement, irrespective of any more particular reason. 

2nd. It is employed (with some other set forms) as a chal- 
lenge to combat, and (probably) acceptation of such challenge. 

3rd. The birds spread and wave their wings whilst chasing 
insects. 

(a) Through excitement merely. 

(b) Possibly to beat down a moth, &c., on to the ground 
(doubtful). 

(c) Possibly again to catch the wind, and assist them in their 
swift runs when it is with them (also doubtful). 

4th. They help themselves with the wings in jumping up at 
flying insects which they are pursuing. (Seen distinctly.) 

5th. I think, but cannot be sure (and assurance is much 
needed), that I saw once (Sept. 4th) a bird pursue a flying insect 
for a short distance on the wing, and near the ground. There 
was no doubt as to the chase on foot, and the flight came, or 
seemed 'to come, as part of such chase. 

Not only were the actions of the birds whilst running (as 
described) exactly like those of the one I had seen catch the 
moths on Sept. 1st, but it would have been difficult to reconcile 
them with any other hypothesis than that of the pursuit of some 
aerial but low-flying prey. They frequently ran the game down, 
pecking it down as it were, and securing it either on or just above 
the ground, though to-day I never once actually saw the pursued 
insect. 

The activity becoming so general and so greatly increased at 
twilight is in accordance with moths beginning to fly then, 


178 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


A social feeling seemed to me to be manifested in this 
hunting scene—a sort of “Have you got one? J have. That 
bird over ;there’s caught two!” idea. But this may be quite 
imaginary. Isolated birds (comparatively alone) ran about in the 
same way. Still, the whole scene with its various little incidents 
gave me that idea. Gradually, as it became dark, the birds all 
flew away, two or three or more together. It often seemed as if 
a chase ended in a flight away, but this may not have been really 
the case. It may have now become too dark for the birds to see 
and chase (perhaps minute) insects, or to see them at all, though 
they seem fairly nocturnal, and their visual powers are no doubt 
in proportion to the very large eyes. 

One bird to-day was sitting right in a Rabbit-burrow. Though 
looking down at it from where I was, I could only see its head, 
shoulders, and upper part of the breast. The whole amphitheatre 
is more or less a Rabbit-warren, and Rabbits and birds were 
often extremely close together. Usually they seemed unaware of 
each other’s existence, but when a Rabbit—either pursued by or 
pursuing another—ran with great speed, and seemed coming 
right down on a bird, the latter would manifest anxiety, and run 
a little to get out of its way. | 

September 5th.—Arrived about 5.30. Fair number of birds 
about, but not nearly so many as yesterday. Almost from time 
of my arrival they were all in more or less constant motion, their 
actions being exactly the same as before, excepting that the 
waving of the wings and little jumps into the air (as described) 
were, though not entirely absent, yet comparatively so. Just in 
front of me the air was peopled with a number of minute insects 
—gnats, flies, or small Hymenoptera—many hovering just above 
the ground, upon which (on blades of grass, &c.) they often 
settled. I make no doubt these, together with small moths, were 
the game pursued. 

A large flock of Starlings came down upon the plateau, 
spreading themselves over the greater part of it, and they behaved 
just as the Plovers—running excitedly about in the same manner, 
and evidently with the same object. What interested me especi- 
ally was that they frequently rose into the air, pursuing and, as I 
feel sure, often catching the game there (sometimes more than 
one in the same rise, J believe), turning and twisting about like 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 179 


Flycatchers, though with less graceful movements. Often, too, 
whilst flying—fairly high—from one part of the plateau to 
another, they would deflect their course in order to catch an 
insect or two en passant. I observed this latter action first, and 
doubted the motive, though it was strongly suggested. After 
seeing the quite unmistakable Flycatcher actions, I felt more 
assured as to the other. 

The very great diminution in the waving of the wings to-day 
as compared to yesterday, whilst engaged in the same pursuit, I 
do not know how to account for. It may perhaps suggest that 
this is more due to excitement connected with each other’s 
presence (social) than to any other cause. If so, the birds were 
not so socially excited to-day as yesterday, and this may possibly 
be due to the fact that their numbers were not nearly so great— 
hardly, I should think, amounting to half. Though I was not 
able to make out with the glasses any insect actually the object 
of pursuit, I did see two small moths flying low over the grass— 
just as required to explain the birds’ actions. I believe, how- 
ever, that the staple of their food was minute flies or gnats. 

As it grew towards twilight—after the Starlings had gone— 
large quantities of Swallows and Martins took possession of the 
air round about. Whether they had come wholly or chiefly or 
partly for the insects I do not know. 

I frightened several birds this time, and as the twilight closed 
in not many were left. Lying just within the edge of the bracken 
birds in ones or twos would often walk past me within twelve 
paces (as I judged), presenting of course a splendid view. A 
sudden bob forward of the head in a very swingy manner, the tail 
at the same time swinging up (very suggestive of a wooden bird 
that performs the same actions upon one’s pulling a string) is a 
characteristic action, and seems to have no special reference to 
anything—unless deportment. 

Left about 7.15. 

September 8th.—Arrived somewhere between 5.30 and 6 p.m. 
Though as cautious as I could be, and keeping well behind the 
bracken (always lying flat), yet several birds took alarm and flew 
off, though not to any great distance. Including these I counted 
forty-one standing scattered about the amphitheatre. They were 
all of them particularly dull and listless, hardly moving from 


180 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


where they stood, and much less occupied in preening their 
feathers than has hitherto been the case. This inaction continued 
up to twilight, and I connect it in some measure at least with an 
unusual absence of insects at this time. For the first time I was 
bothered neither with flies nor (till nearly dark) mosquitoes, nor 
did I see any insect in the air or on the ground in front of me. 
Since the 5th it had rained heavily, and yesterday almost the 
whole day, whilst to-day has been bright and fine. This listless- 
ness is in marked contrast with the great activity of the birds on 
the afternoon of the 5th, which was certainly displayed in catching 
insects, then much en évidence. Still the diminished preening of 
the feathers and almost moping demeanour is not accounted for 
in this way. The only piece of action I observed whilst it was 
still good daylight was when one bird pursued another in a hostile 
manner, a cry being uttered by one of them (I think the pursued 
one) as of distress or remonstrance. (This, at least I think, 
but the birds were at too great a distance for me to be certain that 
it was not another of the birds round about that called.) With 
twilight, however, activity began, and the running and waving of 
wings was now perhaps more marked than it has yet been (at 
least on the part of some of the birds). One bird executed what 
might certainly be described as a dance, making swift (and 
apparently aimless) rushes backwards and forwards, waving the 
wings all the while in an excited manner, making now and again 
(I think) a little leap into the air, and, as a part of all this, a short 
flight just over the ground. I am justified in saying “as a part,” 
for the bird did not stop and fly, and, on alighting, reeommence, 
but the flight arose out of the wild waving and running, and when 
it was over these were at once resumed. Another bird made 
three little runs—advancing, retiring, and again returning—all 
the time with wings upraised and waving, then made a short 
flight close above the ground (describing segment of a circle), 
and, on alighting, continued as before. The birds, as a body, 
behaved similarly. I could not of course observe each one, but 
kept catching the light inner plumage of the wings as they were 
thrown suddenly up. All about now over the plateau the plain- 
tive wailing notes were heard, and gradually—as on former 
occasions—the birds flitted off. I was again lucky in the first of 
the birds, whose dance movements I have more particularly 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 181 


described, being near to me, whilst the second, though a good 
deal farther off, was still plain through the glasses, in spite of 
the increasing gloom. Soon after this I had to lay the glasses 
down, and then I only got ‘dreary gleams about the moorland ”’ 
as the wings of now one and now another bird were flung up. 
The interest to-day lay in the fact that, as far as I could observe, 
this wing-waving “‘ dance ”’—for so, I think, it may be called—did 
not take place during (much less was it incidental to or part of) 
a hunt for food. The birds (soit appears to me) danced it purely 
for its own sake, and not in connection with anything else, which 
I had not felt satisfied about before. With most, at any rate, I 
think this was the case—certainly with the two that I saw best, 
and have chiefly instanced. One bird only I distinctly saw run- 
ning and pecking something (insects presumably) off the dry 
scrubby grass, but this was not waving its wings. 

On the last day of observation (Sept. 5th) the birds were early 
occupied in chasing insects, but it was not till twilight that the 
Wing-waving began to be at all prominent. It then alternated 
with the chase, and it is possible that the two, though quite 
distinct, may sometimes have been combined together into a 
dancing hunt, or hunting dance, as indeed it seemed to me at the 
time (though very likely I was wrong). On all four occasions it 
is the close of the day that has ushered in the dancing, so that it 
would seem that the birds relax themselves in this way before 
leaving their grounds, and flying off into the night. (They are 
active during the night, and their cry is often to be heard as they 
fly high in the air.) But these dance-wavings of the wings must 
be carefully distinguished from when a bird pursuing an insect 
jumps into the air after it, aiding itself with its wings—as might 
naturally be expected. It is also possible that they may some- 
times beat down a moth with the wings, but I do not think this 
has been the explanation of anything I have yet seen. 

September 9th.—Arrived at about 7 p.m., when it was already 
getting dusk. Several birds there, but not so many as the day 
before. They were dancing when I got there, and I noted now, 
without any doubt, that they often made little leaps into the air 
whilst waving the wings—not at all in the same way, however, as 
the bird that I saw jump into the air after an insect. There 
was no doubt whatever as to the motive of that, and I now 


182 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


at once appreciated the difference. Nothing further noted. Left 
at 7.30. | 

September 10th.—Arrived some time between 5 and 6 p.m. 
Thought at first there were no birds there, but at last located 
them—a fair number—far off on the outer edge of the plateau. 
They remained there till shortly after the arrival of a Heron, who 
flew down near the middle of the space. They then began to 
come up, several approaching very close to the Heron—to look at 
him, it almost seemed—and I cannot help thinking, though 
nothing occurred to demonstrate, that they were not indifferent 
to his presence. The shades of evening were now falling, and 
the birds began to disport themselves as before. The light 
seemed more than usually bad for the glasses, so that I had soon 
to lay them down, and I obtained, perhaps without their aid, a 
better general impression. The birds ran about raising and 
waving their wings, often leaping into the air, and often making 
little flights, or rather flittings, over the ground as part of 
the disport, all as described before, uttering at intervals their 
sad wailing cry. It must not be supposed that all the birds 
acted thus at once. It was now one and now another, and the 
eye never caught more than a few gleams (three or four or five) 
of the flung-up wings at one time over the whole space. It was 
a gleam here and a gleam there in the deepening shadows. 
““Dreary gleams about the moorland’ is indeed a line that 
exactly describes the effect. This disporting ended in, and was 
the recognized preliminary to, the bird’s flying off. I counted 
seventeen (but many had flown before I began to count) as they 
flew one after another at short intervals over my head, uttering 
their wild note. Though of the same character, this note, as 
uttered on the ground, is not the same as when uttered flying. 
On the ground it is much more drawn out, and a sort of long 
wailing twitter* often precedes and leads up to the final wail. In 
the air it comes as just a wail without this preliminary. 

These birds, then, stand or sit about during the afternoon (but 
from what hour I do not yet know) in their chosen place of 
assemblage, and if not occupied in catching insects or preening 


“8 This no doubt is the ‘‘clamour” mentioned by Mr. Aplin in ‘ The 
Zoologist ’ for October, 1899 (p. 437). It is full of a wild sad beauty, and 
effective beyond words. I too have only heard it uttered on the ground. 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 183 


themselves are dull and listless. But as the evening falls, and 
the air cools, they cast off their lassitude, think of the joys of 
the night, there is dance and song for a little, and then forth 
they fly. Sad and wailing as are their notes to our ears, they 
are no doubt anything but so to the birds themselves, and, as the 
accompaniment of what seems best described by the word “ dance,”’ 
may perhaps fairly be called “song.” The chants of some savages 
whilst dancing might sound almost as sadly to us, pitched, as they 
would be, in a minor key, and with little that we would call an 
air. Again, if one goes by the birds’ probable feelings—which 
may not be so dissimilar to the savages’, or indeed to our own on 
similar occasions—“ song” and “‘ dance”’ seems a legitimate use 
of words. 

' September 18th.—Arrived 6 p.m. or little after. Very dark 
day. Sky livid and covered with clouds, and close sultry feeling 
as of approaching thunderstorm. It was with difficulty I could 
distinguish some few birds. As the gloom increased I caught a 
gleam or two, but nothing that I could see to note. Only some 
half-dozen or so birds flew over my head at the usual time. 
Whether the birds partook of the dullness of the day, or whether 
the small number checked the inclination to dance (as I suspect), 
there seemed to be very little of this. 

September 14th.—Arrived at about 6 v.m., but have nothing 
special to note except that, there being some fifty or eighty birds 
in the amphitheatre, another large flock of them, numbering, as 
far as I could judge, from seventy-five to one hundred, flew over 
it. They did not, however, settle, and later I alarmed some of 
the standing ones, who flew farther away. Afterwards I counted 
thirty-five, but this may have included the later. This shows 
what numbers of the Great Plover there are in this part of 
England. Long may they continue, and (that they may) may 
nobody take the smallest interest in them! 

September 15th.—(Weather dull, sky overclouded.) Arrived 
about 5.30 p.m. There were not many birds that I could make 
out, and none near. A drizzling rain soon began, and this 
increased gradually, but not beyond a smart drizzle. Shortly 
after the rain commenced the birds began to come down from 
where I had seen them, and (evidently) from other parts on the 
outer edge of the amphitheatre, and to spread all over it till 


184 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


there were numbers of them, and dancing of a more pronounced, 
or at least of a more violent kind than I had yet seen, com- 
menced. Otherwise it was quite the same, but the extra degree 
of excitement made it, of course, much more interesting. It 
was, in fact, remarkable and extraordinary. Running forward 
with wings extended and slightly raised, a bird would suddenly 
fling them high up, and then, as it were, ‘“‘ pitch” about over 
the ground, waving and tossing them, stopping short, turning, 
pitching forward again, leaping into the air, descending and con- 
tinuing, till with another leap it would make a short eccentric 
flight low over the ground, and pitch suddenly down in a sharp 
curve. I talk of their “pitching”’ about because their move- 
ments seemed at times hardly under control, and each violent 
run or plunge ending, in fact, with a sudden pitch forward of the 
body, the wings straggling about (often pointed forward over the 
head) in an uncouth dislocated sort of way, the effect was as if 
the birds were being blown about over the ground in a violent 
wind.* They seemed, in fact, to be crazy, and their sudden and 
abrupt return, after a few mad moments, to propriety and decorum 
had a curious and “bizarre”’ effect. Though having just seen 
them behave so, one seemed almost to doubt that they had. One 
bird in particular that had come to within a moderate distance of 
me made itself conspicuous in the way I have tried to describe. 
It was one of some half a dozen gathered together under a 
solitary crab-apple tree almost directly opposite me, and both 
with the naked eye and the glasses I observed them all thoroughly 
well. One would often run at or pursue another with these 
antics. I saw one that was standing quietly caught, and, as it 
were, covered. up in a little storm of wings before it could run 
away and begin waving its own. These little chases were evi- 
dently in sport, not anger. Very different was the action and 
demeanour of the two birds I saw about to fight. This and the 
general behaviour of the group made it evident that they were 
stimulated in their dance-antics by each other’s presence. This 
is by far the finest display of the sort that I have yet seen, and 
must certainly be due to the rain, which the birds obviously 
enjoyed. They had been quite dull and listless before, but as 


** There was little or no wind after the rain commenced, nor has this 
explanation been tenable as yet even in the smallest degree. 


HABITS OF THH GREAT PLOVER. 185 


soon as it fell they spread themselves all over the plateau, and 
the dancing began. As far as I could observe, the birds now 
were very little occupied in procuring food. There was a peck 
or so at something now and again, but this was casual, and, as it 
were, an interlude. The constant quick running and stopping 
whilst the wings were folded appeared to me to be only a part 
(the less excited part) of the general emotion, out of which the 
_ sudden frenzies arose. There was also the usual vocal accom- 
paniment. As soon as they had spread themselves out over the 
amphitheatre the wailing note went up, and was caught and 
repeated from one part of it to another at greater or less intervals. 
‘The whole ended in flight as before. 

I remark a great difference in the shade of these birds, 
plumage. The breast and ventral surface is indeed light in all, 
but, whilst the back is in some so dark as to look, towards 
evening, almost black through the glasses, in others it is so much 
lighter that it looks almost white by contrast, or even of itself. 

September 17th.—About 1 p.m. walked towards the amphi- 
theatre without concealing myself, wishing merely to ascertain if 
birds were there at that hour. WhenI was still a good way off a 
very large number rose into the air, and I then edged off so as 
not to alarm them further, and to let them resettle, which after a 
time they did, and I retired. 

At 11 p.m., it being bright moonlight, I again went to the 
place, and walked around and over the entire amphitheatre, 
noticing and picking up several feathers in the moonlight. I did 
not put up a single bird, nor could I hear their cry anywhere 
around. The place was quite deserted. Returning, I had the 
pleasure of liberating a poor Rabbit caught in one of those 
vile toothed traps, the selling or possession of which should be 
made a criminal offence, with punishment to “fit the crime,” 
4 la Mikado. 3 


(To be continued.) 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., Aprii, 1900. 6 


186 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


MAMMALIA. 


INSECTIVORA. 


Varieties of Mole.—The variety of Talpa europea mentioned by Mr. 
Forrest (ante, p. 142) is not at all uncommon in some parts of the country. 
In their various stages they are known to the Mole-catchers as “ blue ” 
Moles. I have several in my possession. The most difficult variety of 
Mole to get hold of is one spotted with white—at least that is my experi- 
ence. I have a good series of skins, but have never been able so far 
to obtain a spotted example. 

With regard to WareR SHREws being found far from water, I have 
several times noticed this, and have picked them up dead when shooting 
on dry sandy land, where the nearest pond or stream was some mile or so 
away.—OxLry GrasHam (Heworth, York). 


Lesser Shrew in Shropshire.—The Rev. W. Lightfoot Harrison, of 
Great Woolaston, sent me, on March 15th, a little animal which he had 
found in his garden the previous day. On examination it proved to be a 
specimen of the Lesser Shrew (Sorex pygmaeus), a species which has never 
before been recorded in Shropshire. It will be placed in the Shrewsbury 
Museum.—H. E. Forrest (Bayston Hill, near Shrewsbury). 


UNGULATA. 


Equus quagga, L.—I have for some time been collecting information 
regardiug the Quagga of South Africa, which, it is feared, is now wholly 
extinct, though other members of the family still survive in sadly diminished 
numbers. I should be glad for any information on the following points : 
Former range of the Quagga; range of variation in colour, if any; breeding 
season ; Quaggas born in captivity; Quagga hybrids with Horse or other 
animal; date when a living Quagga was last seen in its old haunts; any 
aged animal still living in captivity. I have already details of external 
characters, male and female, and fcetal young ; food; museum specimens ; 
Lord Morton’s Quagga hybrid, and so on. I should specially like to hear 
of any specimens preserved in museums ; my list already comprises London, 
Edinburgh, York, Manchester, Paris, Leyden, Amsterdam, Berlin, Berne, — 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 187 


and Cape Town. Itshould be remembered that the true Quagga is meant, 
and not the comparatively common Bonte-Quagga, or Burchell’s Zebra. All 
_ assistance would be gratefully acknowledged should enough information be 
gathered to publish in book form. — Gragam RensHaw (Sale Bridge 
House, Sale, Manchester). 
AVES. 

Blackcap in March.—On March 12th I heard a Blackcap (Sylvia 
atricapilla) singing among the thorn-trees on Clifton Down, and had a good 
view of the bird more than once. It is natural to suppose that it has spent 
the winter in England.—Hersert C. Piayne (Clifton College). 


Wild Swans in North Iveland.—It may interest some of the readers 
of ‘The Zoologist’ to learn that there was an unusually large migration of 
Wild Swans to Loughs Swilly and Foyle this winter. Mr. D. C. Campbell, 
of Templemore Park, Londonderry, writes me “ that one hundred and fifty 
have been seen in one flock on Lough Foyle, and quite a number have been 
frequenting the river some miles above Derry.” Besides those noticed by 
me near Bartragh in ‘ The Zoologist ’ (ante, p. 39), several other flocks have 
been seen and heard passing to the various lakes during this winter.— 
Ropert WarREN (Moyview, Ballina). 


Unusual Numbers of Green Plover in Worcestershire.—During the 
winter large flocks of Green Plover (Vanellus vulgaris) in this county have 
been an unusual occurrence. They began to arrive in October, and during 
November, December, and January the flocks were enormous. They seemed 
to be plentiful over the whole of the northern half of the county, every suitable 
field having a certain number on it, the water meadows especially being very 
much frequented by them. Golden Plover also, which I consider rare in 
this part of the county, were, during November and December, quite 
common. For years the numbers of Green Plover in this district seemed 
to be decreasing for no apparent reason; I was therefore much pleased to 
see them return in such numbers. I might also mention that Bramblings 
and Redwings arrived in greater numbers than they have done for ten years, 
and remained all through the wihter, feeding with other Finches on stubbles, 
except for the first fortnight after their arrival, when, as usual, they fed on 
the beech-mast.—H. E. Howarp (Stone House, near Kidderminster). 


Bleater Snipes (Gallinago celestis) near Aberdeen.—My attention 
was directed on the 5th of last July toa male of this species, which was pro- 
ducing the peculiar noise which gives these birds theirname. I againsawa 
pair of these Snipe on July 16th, which led me to suppose that they were 
breeding in the locality. Although they were so often seen through the 
season as to show that they were resident, neither nest nor young were seen 


to prove that they had nested. The occurrence of these two birds remaining 
02 


188 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


here during the nesting season is worthy of notice, as not having happened, 
to my knowledge, for many years, although I have sometimes seen a 
solitary specimen at different times in various summers during that period. 
The birds are not rare here in winter, an occasional one being frequently 
seen. It is the appearance of the pair during the nesting season which 
surprised me. I recollect when several pairs nested near here, but they 
decreased to only a pair or so nesting in an occasional season. ‘Then they 
became so reduced that no nesting was known. It would be interesting to 
know whether there have been any other extensions in the summer range 
of these birds during the past season. I have a special reason in being 
interested in the question, because for several years their favourite haunts 
were practically overrun by Rabbits, which are well known as being very 
much disliked by various other animals. Means were taken during the 
previous winter to decrease the number of these rodents on the spots the 
Snipe frequented during the past summer, and the idea crossed my mind 
that the Snipe had found their way to the marshy moorland after the 
Rabbits had been decimated there, and that the presence of the latter had 
kept the former away on some previous years at least —W. Wi.son (Alford, 
Aberdeen, N.B.). 


Birds Singing during a Thunderstorm.—For some reason or other I 
have missed reading my ‘ Zoologist’ for July, 1898, until now, and so have 
only just seen an interesting little note by Mr. Horsbrugh on this subject 
at p. 822. Mr. Horsbrugh records the singing of many Thrushes and a 
few Chaffinches during a heavy thunderstorm on May 23rd, 1898. I can 
add the Wood-Pigeon to his list; and in the ‘ Irish Naturalist’ for October, 
1899, at p. 231, will be found a short note in which I mentioned that the 
cooing of Wood-Pigeons was in no way interrupted by a heavy thunder- 
storm, accompanied by rain, on Aug. 18th, 1898. The voices of these 
birds were constantly audible between the thunder-claps. — G. E. H. 
Barrett-Hami.ton (Kilmarnock, Arthurstown, Co. Wexford, Treland). 


PISCES. 


Blue Shark in Killala Bay: a Correction.—In my notice in the 
January number of ‘ The Zoologist ’ of the occurrence of a Blue Shark on 
the island of Bartragh, I erroneously named it the Blue Shark from the 
description received from a person to whom Capt. Kirkwood related the 
occurrence. However, on meeting Capt. Kirkwood, and talking about the 
fish, it was evidently a fine specimen of the Fox Shark (Alopecias vulpes), 
103 ft. large, and the elongated portion of the tail-fin nearly as long as the 
body, fully 4 ft.in length; and he was so struck with this peculiarity of the 


tail that he cut it off and brought it home.—Ropert Warren (Moyview, 
Ballina). 


oS 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 189 


[Second-hand identifications are always unreliable. We were under the 
impression that Mr. Warren had satisfied himself as to the identity of the 
species.— Ep. | 


PRESERVATION OF ZOOLOGICAL SPECIMENS. 


Hard-sat Eggs: a Suggestion.—As the nesting season is now at hand, 
I should like to suggest a method of dealing with hard-sat eggs which I 
have not yet seen mentioned in ‘ The Zoologist.’ Of course no one would 
think of taking hard-sat eggs when fresh ones could be obtained, but some- 
times we come across valuable eggs which one does not. like to leave, even 
if much incubated. Some collectors endeavour to extract the embryo with 
fine hooks, with or without previously dismembering it with fine scissors 
(embryotomy); others cut a door in the shell, which is replaced after 
removal of the chick; while others again insert chemicals into the shell 
through the drill-hole. As is well known, skeletons of small mammals or 
birds may readily be obtained by placing the body of the creature near an 
ant’s nest, when the bones will speedily be picked clean by the swarming 
and industrious insects. In the same way they would probably devour the 
contents of a hard-sat egg, as the foetal tissues, being only partially de- 
veloped, would be more easily disintegrated than those of an adult animal; 
and it would be well worth while, in the case of a hard-sat and valuable egg, 
to drill a hole in the shell large enough to admit an ant, and, after cautiously 
breaking up the contents a little with a pin, to place it on the ground close 
to an ant’s nest, where it could be left for a few days, if suitably protected 
from dust and injury. A very delicate and thin-shelled egg might be 
injured by the powerful mandibles of ground-loving beetles, such as those 
of the Carabus and Staphylinus type, but this would be only a rare and 
occasional accident. The embryo, however putrid, being enclosed in a 
shell, would probably not tempt the efforts of the burying-beetles, such as 
Necrophorus ruspator or N. vespillo ; and I trust that this method may be 
of service in saving valuable eggs during the coming season.—GRAHAM 
Rensuaw (Sale Bridge House, Sale, Manchester). 


( 190 ) 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


A Monograph of Christmas Island (Indian Ocean). Physical 
Features and Geology by CHartes W. AnpDrREws, B.A., 
B.Sc., &c.; with descriptions of the Fauna and Flora by 
numerous contributors. Published by the Trustees of the 
British Museum. 


Tus is the account of a piece of real biological work, well 
conceived and admirably carried out. It is truly zoological, 
inasmuch as paleontology has not been neglected; and by the 
inclusion of botany it becomes in a proper sense a full account of 
the natural history of the island. Christmas Island is situated 
in the eastern part of the Indian Ocean, in §. lat. 10° 25’, E. 
long. 105° 42’. Java, the nearest land, is about 190 miles to 
the north, while some 900 miles to the south-east is the coast of 
North-West Austraha. Geologically, as Mr. Andrews describes 
it, ‘‘ the island is, in fact, the flat summit of a submarine moun- 
tain more than 15,000 ft. high, the depth of the platform from 
which it rises being about 14,400 ft., and its height above the sea 
being upwards of 1000 ft.’ SirJohn Murray defrayed the neces- 
sary expenses for the expedition, which was successfully carried 
out by Mr. Andrews, one of the staff of the British Museum. 

Collections were made in all branches of natural history, 
and these, as a rule, have been worked out by specialists in their 
respective groups. Anthropology is alone discarded, but neces- 
sarily, for when visited by H.M.S. ‘ Egeria’ in 1887, “the island 
was found to be entirely uninhabited, and there was no indica- 
tion that it had ever been occupied.” 

Readers of this Journal will enjoy the bionomical notes of Mr. 
Andrews which are attached to the more technical references to 
many species. We can only notice afew. The Rat (Mus macleari) 
has for natural food mainly fruits and young shoots, and to obtain 
these it ascends trees to a great height. We read:—‘“‘I have 
often seen them run up the trailing stems of the lianas, and, in 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 191 


fact, they can climb as well as a squirrel. In the settlement 
they utterly destroy all the fruit they can get at, and frequently 
come into conflict with the fruit-bats on the tops of the papaia- 
trees.” The Frigate-bird (F'regata aquila) forms an article of 
_ food for the inhabitants, and is easily captured. A man climbs 
*‘into the topmost branches of a high tree near the coast, armed 
with a pole eight or ten feet long and a red handkerchief. The 
latter he waves about, at the same time yelling as loud as possible. 
The birds attracted by the noise and the red colour swoop round 
in large numbers, when they are knocked down with the long 
pole.” Fresh information is also recorded concerning our old 
friend the Robber Crab (Birgus latro). ‘They have a curious habit 
of often dragging their food long distances before attempting to 
eat it. I have seen a Crab laboriously pulling a bird’s wing up 
the first inland cliff, half-a-mile or more from the camp whence 
it had stolen it.” 

The geographical relations of the fauna and flora are mostly 
Indo-Malayan, and, although a large number of species are 
described as endemic, especially among the insects, this is 
probably owing to the entomological fauna of the neighbouring 
islands being still imperfectly known. The volume is well 
illustrated with twenty-two plates, a map, and numerous cuts in 
the text, and worthily upholds the character of British Museum 
publications. 


The Atoll of Funafuti, Ellice Group: its Zoology, Botany, Ethno- 
logy, and General Structure. Based on collections made by 
Mr. Cuartes Hepitry. Sydney: published by order of 
the Trustees of the Australian Museum, 


Part I. of this excellent memoir appeared in 1896, and Part 
VIII., concluding it, was published last:year. It altogether relates 
to the atoll of Funafuti, which was discovered by Capt. Peyster 
on March 18th, 1819. According to the observations of Capt. 
Wilkes, it lies in lat. 8° 30’ 45” south, long. 179° 13’ 80” east,— 
‘a position which may otherwise be described as due north of 
Fiji, and precisely half way between that and the Equator.” 

Part I. is devoted to a general account of the atoll, its 


192 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


structure, climate, vegetation, and population, the last topic 
being necessarily more or less ethnological, but its ethnology is 
treated also alone in Part IV., and these sections are all from the 
pen of Mr. Hedley. Some short notes on rock specimens are 
contributed by Dr. T. Cooksey. Aves are described by Mr. 


J. North, but as the ornithological collection consisted of only | 


“six specimens, referable to four well-known Australian species,” 
there was not much to write about. The interesting fact of the 
Frigate-bird (Fregata aquila) being domesticated by the natives 
and used as a carrier bird is, however, thoroughly dealt with. The 
Insecta and Arachnid have been studied by Mr. W. J. Rainbow, 
and the Crustacea and HKchinodermata by Mr. T. Whitelegge, 
who has also dealt with the Alcyonaria, Sponges, Madreporaria, 
Hydrozoa, Scyphozoa, Actinozoa, and Vermes. Mammals, Rep- 
tiles, and Fishes have been detailed by Mr. Edgar R. Waite. 
‘“‘Hixcluding the birds, the indigenous terrestrial vertebrate fauna 
appears to be comprised in five species—a Rat and four Lizards.” 
The Enteropneusta, which comprised two species, form a subject 
for truly biological treatment by Mr. Jas. P. Hill, and the 
Mollusca are naturally taken in hand by Mr. Hedley, who is the 
Conchologist of the Australian Museum. 

In a summary of the fauna we read: ‘‘ Prior to the advent 
of the Exxpedition, not more than eight species of animals were 
recorded in literature from Funafuti”; these published lists 
now ‘‘embrace about eight hundred and fifty entries.” Zoologists 
will congratulate all concerned on the good work done, and those 
who study zoo-geography will value the volume. 


The Norwegian North Polar Expedition, 1893-1896. Scientific 
Results. Edited by Friptsor Nansen. Vol. I. London, 
New York, Bombay: Longmans, Green & Co. 


NANSEN’s voyage in the ‘Fram’ is well known to the many 
Kinglish readers who have perused ‘Farthest North.’ But, 
beyond geographical exploration, natural science was also deeply 
interested in this boreal expedition, and the results achieved are 
now receiving publication in a handsome and complete form, of 
which the first volume is before us. 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 193 


The first contribution is by Dr. Pompeckj, on “ The Jurassic 
fauna of Cape Flora,” which, as Nansen informs us, “ situated 
in circ. 79° 56’ N. lat. and circ. 49° 40’ E. long., is the western 
extremity of the long and narrow peninsula which forms the 
south-western part of Northbrook Island.” Unfortunately the 
fossils examined were generally in a very imperfect condition, but 
some complete work even under these circumstances was ac- 
complished, and a fauna of at least twenty-six forms demonstrated 
as occurring in the Jurassic Sedimentary Rocks collected by 
Nansen in the Cape Flora district. Among the peculiar features 
of the fauna may be just mentioned the ‘“‘ prominent part which 
the Ammonite genus Cadoceras plays in its composition’”’; while 
in all the known fossils from the marine jura of Cape Flora, the 
_Gastropoda are represented by a single specimen only. The 
Callovian fauna Dr. Pompeckj reports as ‘‘nothing but a part of 
the fauna of the Russian Callovian.”’ 

The description of the ‘Fossil Plants” are outside the 
province of this Journal, and we pass on to an account of the 
“Birds,” by Prof. Collett and Dr. Nansen, the first named of 
whom has contributed the strictly ornithological matter, while 
the second has added personal observations. This contribution 
is eminent by a very full account of the Roseate Gull (Rhodostethia 
rosea), referred to in more than one place, and in its juvenile 
first plumage forming the subject for a very beautiful chromo 
plate. | ‘ 

The Crustacea are described by Prof. Sars, and, when this 
’ excellent authority receives sufficient material, we all expect a 
banquet in biological information, and we are not here dis- 
appointed. We read: ‘‘ As is well known, it has until recently 
been the general assumption of geographers, that the Polar basin, 
north of Siberia and Franz Josef Land, could only be quite a 
shallow sea, with depths scarcely’ exceeding some hundred 
fathoms, and the zoological equipment of the ‘Fram’ Expedition 
was arranged in accordance therewith. But, in direct contradiction 
to this generally adopted view, that part of the Polar Sea through 
which the ‘Fram’ drifted with the ice proved to be everywhere 
of enormous depth, exceeding in this respect even the Norwegian 
Sea.” Although it is probable that there is very little animal 
life on the bottom: in this part of the ocean, it was remarked that 


194 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


the more superficial strata of the sea, though almost perpetually 
covered with a layer of ice, were found to abound with life, at 
all seasons, and in the most northerly altitudes reached. But 
Prof. Sars is of opinion that these pelagic animals are not strictly 
confined to the more superficial strata of the sea, “ but that they 
also at times descend to considerable depths, perhaps even to 
the strata immediately covering the bottom.” Forms also 
hitherto regarded as southern in distribution have been found in 
the Polar Sea; in the pelagic Copepoda, a Calanoid, of the genus 
Hemicalanus, hitherto only recorded from the Mediterranean and 
the tropical parts of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, being a 
case in point. Thirty-six plates illustrate this contribution. 


Text-Book of Palaeontology. By Karu A. von Zitreu. Translated 
and edited by CHarutes R. Eastman, Ph.D. Macmillan & 
Co., Limited. 

Ir is perhaps as difficult to imagine a science of zoology 
divorced from the past in paleontology, as a form of theology 
without any reference to a future existence, or a history strictly 
confined to modern events alone. Paleontology is one of the 
great witnesses to the truth of organic evolution, which we all 
regard as the philosophy of natural history. 

This is not merely a translation, but rather an adaptation of 
Zittel’s ‘Grundziige der Palaeontologie,’ for though the chapters 
on Protozoa and Coelenterata stand essentially as in the original, 
“nearly all the remaining chapters have been remodelled, 
enlarged, and brought as nearly as possible up to date by a 
selected body of experts.” The ‘Grundziuge’ itself was published 
as recently as the spring of 1895, and, although radical depar- 
tures have been made with the author’s sanction, ‘‘ one must by 
no means presume he is thereby committed to all the innovations 
which are set forth.” No fewer than twelve collaborators have 
assisted the editor, so that a “‘new and revised edition ”’ is per- 
haps necessary to be added to the term “ translation.” 

The present volume is devoted to what are usually considered 
‘the lower forms of life.” Seven “‘Sub-Kingdoms ”—to use the 
term employed—are described, viz.: Protozoa, Coelenterata, 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 195 


Echinodermata, Vermes, Molluscoidea, Mollusca, and Arthro- 
poda, the Vertebrata being reserved for the next volume. In 
the introduction we are reminded how even in paleontology we 
have advanced beyond the Linnean and Cuvierian conceptions, 
when we read: “ Those holding to the theory of descent, evolution, 
or transmutation, look upon varieties, species, subgenera, genera, 
families, orders, classes, and sub-kingdoms, as distinctions of 
merely transient importance, corresponding to the state of our 
information at the present time; it being assumed that by means 
of gradual transmutation during the course of ages all organisms 
have become evolved from a single primitive cell, or from a few 
primitive types.” 

This excellent German work, made accessible to the strictly 
English reader under purely American supervision, forms a 
work of reference that zoologists will find most useful to consult. 
Even with its more than 700 pages of letterpress, containing 
1476 figures, its subject matter is very far from exhausted, 
and its value lies in its summarized information. This is 
evident when we refer to the Insecta, revised by no less than the 
greatest paleontological authority on the subject, Prof. S. H. 
Scudder, and find that the information is compressed in ten pages. 
Those who are familiar with the paleontological writings on this 
subject by Prof. Scudder alone will not fail to comprehend that 
even this portly volume is but a digest of the ancient history of 
animal life. 


An Elementary Course of Practical Zoology. By the late T. 
JEFFERY Parker, D.Sc., F.R.S., and W. N. Parker, Ph.D. 
Macmillan & Co., Limited. 


However much in our daily life we may somewhat avoid the 
too practical man, there can be little doubt we want more practical 
zoologists. The average naturalist to-day is perhaps concerned 
overmuch with the outsides of animals, and a very large pro- 
portion indeed of conclusions and theories are based on animal 
appearances. Surface zoology in a strict sense should rank very 
little higher than surface geology; but how few of us have now 
either the time, opportunity, or desire for undertaking even 


196 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


ordinary dissection. This volume is an incentive to make us 
really understand all that can be practically learned about a few 
typical animals, and the thorough mastery of the anatomical 
and physiological details of these living forms will leaven the 
whole lump of many zoological conceptions. In fact, as the 
author states—for one only is now left—‘“Throughout the book 
I have borne in mind that the main object of teaching zoology 
as a part of a liberal education is to familiarise the student not 
so much with the facts as with the ideas of the science.” 

The first thirteen chapters are devoted to the Frog; attention 
is then paid to some of the most primitive forms of animal life, 
after which the objects of study are those familiar ‘“ zoological 
models,” the Karthworm, the Crayfish, and the Fresh-water 
Mussel. A few illustrations of the Vertebrata follow, and the 
concluding chapter is chiefly of an embryological character. In 
the summary of views respecting the subject of organic evolution 
we meet with an advice which we do not remember having seen 
elsewhere :—‘‘ As a preliminary to the study of Darwin’s ‘ Origin 
of Species,’ the student is recommended to read Romanes’ ‘ Evi- 
dences of Organic Evolution,’ in which the doctrine of Descent 
is expounded as briefly as is consistent with clearness and 
accuracy.” 


General Index to Miss Ormerod’s Reports on Injurious Insects, 
1877 to 1898. 

Report of Injurious Insects and Common Farm Pests during the 
Year 1899, with Methods of Prevention and Remedy. By 
Eiveanon A. Ornmerop, F.R.Met.Soc., &c. Simpkin, 
Marshall, Hamilton, Kent & Co., Limited. 


Durine a period of twenty-two years Miss Ormerod has 
issued her Annual Reports on Injurious Insects. The quantity 
of valuable information, thus one may almost say interred, 
except to the diligent readers of these reports, is now accessible 
to all by the publication of an excellent index compiled by Mr. 
Robert Newstead, himself well acquainted with the subject. 

The twenty-third Report for 1899 commences a second series, 
and is in no way inferior to its predecessors. Miss Ormerod’s 


¢ 


NOTICES OF NEW. BOOKS. 197 


“study” must be a veritable ‘“‘Scotland Yard” for insect de- 


predators. Here an account is kept of all previous convictions, 


and the names, habits, and life-histories of all these agricultural 
criminals are accurately recorded and regularly published, while 
the most speedy and convenient methods for their destruction are 
studied and advised. We fear, however, that these annual reports 


are not sufficiently procured by our agriculturists, fruit-growers, 
and foresters, to whom they should prove indispensable; while 
all who take an interest in a garden—‘“‘and who loves a garden 


loves a greenhouse too’’—will find aid in its pages to resist the . 
attacks of many enemies. We sometimes scarcely estimate the 
size of these insect hordes which ravage our crops. One of Miss 
Ormerod’s correspondents, a head-schoolmaster, relates that 


during the late season, when the larve of White Cabbage 


Butterflies made dreadful havoc among the cabbages and similar 
plants, he put two boys at a time during their dinner-hour, in 
his small garden of about a quarter of an acre, with a net to catch 
these butterflies, of which in seven days they caught and killed no 
fewer than 834. Again, from two hundred and forty plants the 
boys gathered more than 5000 caterpillars. 

Insects alone do not curtail Miss Ormerod’s work, and in this 
issue we have a most interesting account of the Snail-Slug 
(Testacella haliotidea), an animal which is labelled (Beneficial) 
“ridding us of small ground vermin; they are wholly carnivorous, 
and prey chiefly on Earthworms, but also on Slugs and Snails, 


and even on each other.”’ 


198 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 


Mr. A. Smita WoopwakpD, in this month’s issue of the ‘ Annals and 
Magazine of Natural History,’ has announced the discovery of an extinct 
Kel (Urenchelys anglicus) in the English Chalk. The writer observes :— 
‘«‘ There is thus no doubt that the Apodal fishes date back to the Cretaceous 
period... .'. A well-preserved skull of a typical Kel from the Lower Chalk 
of Clayton, Sussex, is to be recognized in the Willett Collection in the 


Brighton Museum.” 


At a meeting of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, held at Calcutta in 
January last, Major Alcock exhibited some enlarged drawings of the 
well-known caterpillar of the Notodontid moth, Stawropus alternus, and 
remarked :—‘ These caterpillars, which can be found in Calcutta and its 
vicinity in the rainy season, are as extraordinary in look as they are 
in behaviour. When touched they turn the hinder end of the body over 
on to the back, in the manner of an enraged Scorpion, and then begin to 
tremble as if agitated by the most uncontrollable emotion. ‘There are 
certain particularly irascible Ants that behave somewhat in the same way, 
and there can be little doubt that the suggestion which has been made that 
the attitude of the alarmed Stawropus caterpillar may be mistaken by its 
enemies for the offensive posture of an Ant of enormous dimensions is 
somewhere near the truth. The insects that accompany these drawings 
are common enough during the monsoon in Calcutta, and I recommend 
them to your further notice. No observer can watch their behaviour with- 
out admiration. Of their power to terrify creatures like birds, whose high 
esthetic and emotional development cannot but be accompanied by at least 
the germs of superstition, there can be no uncertainty.” 

Mr. de Nicéville, in criticising these remarks, considered that, although 
perhaps the “ scares” might frighten birds, their most important function 
was to terrify ichneumon-flies and parasitic Diptera, which were far the 
most active enemies that caterpillars had to contend against. For this 
reason he thought that the more commonly received idea that the Stauropus 
caterpillar, when irritated, resembled a Spider was nearer to the truth. 


_ WE have received the Report for the year 1899 reiating to the Ghizeh 
Zoological Gardens, near Cairo, by tne Director, Stanley S. Flower, F.Z.S. 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 199 


The mammals, birds, and reptiles contained in the collection on the 6th 
October, 1899, comprised 473 specimens and 132 species. 
In addition to the above, there are many animals living at large in the 

Gardens, which form one of the chief attractions of the place. Great care 
is taken to encourage the wild birds, and their numbers seem to have 
increased considerably during 1899. The most noticeable of these birds 
are :— . 

Song-Thrush (Turdus musicus). 

White Water-Wastail (Motacilla alba). 

Grey-headed Yellow Water-Wagtail (Motacilla cinereocapilla). 

Common Sparrow (Passer domesticus). 

Honded Crow (Corvus cornia). 

Kingfisher (Alcedo ispida). 

Pied Kingfisher (Ceryle rudis). 

Hoopoe ( Upupa epops). 

Grey-headed Love Bird (Agapornis cana). 

Barn Owl (Strix flammea). 

Southern Little Owl (Carine meridionalis). 

Kestrel (Tinnunculus alaudarius). 

Egyptian Kite (Milvus egyptius). 

Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea). 

Night Heron (Nycticorax griseus). 

Wild Duck (Anas boscas). 

Common Teal (Querquedula crecca). 

Turtle-Dove (Turtur senegalensis). 

Stone-Curlew (Cidicnemus crepitans). 


AUSTRALIAN ornithologists—a body of students which, we believe, is 
increasing—will doubtless appreciate ‘ A Key to the Birds of Australia and 
Tasmania, with their Geographical Distribution in Australia,’ by Robert 
Hall. A beginning is.made with 767 known species, but assuredly many 
more are to be discovered in this wide, and in many parts little-worked, 
area. A short description is given of each species, and the value of the list 
would have been much enhanced if a reference to the publication of the 
original description had also been given. This publication is in convenient 
form for pocket reference, and we should have greatly valued a similar 
compilation when collecting in other parts of the world. It is published 
by Melville, Mullen & Slade at Melbourne, and by Dulau & Co., London. 


Pror. C. O. Wurrman has reprinted and issued in a separate form his 
lecture on “ Animal Behaviour,” delivered at the Marine Biological 


200 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Laboratory, Wood’s Holl, Mass., U.S.A. Some most valuable and interesting 


observations on the life-histories of Leeches (Clepsine) are detailed, though 


the publication is mostly of a philosophical character. Special emphasis is 
devoted to the view ‘“ that instincts are evolved, not improvised, and that 


their genealogy may be as complex and far-reaching as the history of their 


organic bases.” 


oe 


WE have received from our contributor, Prof. J. H. Salter, a “ List of 


the Birds of Aberystwyth and Neighbourhood,’ published by the University | 


College of Wales Scientific Society. We need scarcely observe that such 
lists are highly valued by ornithologists, especially when compiled by com- 
petent authority, as is done in the present instance. 


Mr. L. Upcorr Gitt has again produced his annual ‘ Naturalists’ 
Directory.’ The publication for 1900 is far in advance of its predecessors. 
We no longer rotice the absence of so many well-known names, though 
we think a reference to our pages could increase the number of British 
zoologists. The List of Societies, Field Clubs, and Museums is a welcome 
feature of this inexpensive and very useful handbook. 


Tue death is announced, in his eighty-sixth year, of Canon Atkinson, the 
well-known author of ‘ Forty Years in a Moorland Parish,’ a delightful 
volume which was published some nine years ago. He had held the living 
of Danby-in-Cleveland for nearly three years over the half-century, and 
during his incumbency he calculated that he had walked 70,000 miles 


whilst engaged in clerical work. He was a naturalist, an antiquarian, and 


a sportsman. 


We also regret to record the death of Dr. St. George Mivart, which 
occurred on April Ist, at the age of seventy-three. The deceased was a 
zoologist who was best known as a polemical writer, his ‘ Genesis of Species,’ 
though anti-Darwinian, being recognized by Huxley as worthy of combat, 
and who described Mivart as “less of a Darwinian than Mr. Wallace, for 
he has less faith in the power of natural selection. But he is more of an 
evolutionist than Mr. Wallace, because Mr. Wallace thinks it necessary to 
call in an intelligent agent—a sort of supernatural Sir John Sebright—to 
produce even the animal frame of man; while Mr. Mivart requires no 
Divine assistance till he comes to man’s soul.” Dr. Mivart, as before 
mentioned, was an accomplished zoologist. ‘To the ‘“ man in the street” he 
will be remembered by his recently published differences with the Roman 
Church, with which he had been long in communion. 


fHE ZOOLOGIST 


No. 707.—May, 1900. 


BIRD NOTES FROM NORTH-EAST LINCOLNSHIRE 
DURING THE AUTUMN MIGRATION OF 1899. 


By G. H. Caton Haiau. 


THE autumn migration of 1899 resembled that of the previous 
year in the absence of any of those great migratory movements 
generally called ‘rushes,’ but differed in the absence of that 
quiet daily inflow of birds which characterised almost the whole 
of that season. : 

A remarkable feature in the past autumn was the scarcity 
of all Waders except Curlews, Grey and Golden Plovers, and 
Knots. 

The first movement of land birds occurred on Aug. 28rd, but 
only comprised two or three species, and was scarcely noticeable. 
Throughout September very little migration took place. West 
and south-west winds prevailed during the whole month, the 
latter half of which was decidedly stormy. 

The principal movements of the season occurred during 
October and the first half of November at four separate periods 
or rushes, namely, Oct. 4th to 9th, 17th to 21st, 27th to 30th 
and Nov. 7th to 10th. Much migration was, however, in pro- 
gress all through October and the early part of November. 
October opened with much rain, and a gale from the east, which 
changed to south-west on 2nd and 3rd. The rest of the month 
was fairly calm, with south and south-west winds during the first 


half, and easterly winds from 14th to the end; while November, 
Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., May, 1900. e 


202 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


up to the middle of the month, was characterised by light south 
wind and dull weather. Among the rarer visitors may be 
numbered the second Lincolnshire exampie of the Barred 
Warbler, the Arctic Bluethroat, Red-necked Phalarope, Spotted 
Redshank, Wood-Sandpiper, and Great Snipe, as well as such 
unusual migrants as the Wood-Wren, Grasshopper- Warbler, and 
Barn-Owl. 

There are also some notable absentees, such as the Ring- 
Ouzel, Great Grey Shrike, Pied Woodpecker, and Wood-Pigeon. 
On the whole, however, the amount of visible migration was 
below the average of recent years. 


Turdus viscivorus, Linn. Mistle-Thrush.—Appeared on the 
coast in great numbers, taking part in the “rush” of small birds 
of Oct. 4th and 5th; again numerous on 9th, and finally was still 
more abundant in the movement of Oct. 17th to 21st. 

T’. musicus, Linn. Song-Thrush.— A very small migration 
compared with that of 1898. A good many appeared in turnip 
and potato fields near the coast on Sept. 11th, and again in the 
hedges, with Redwings and Blackbirds, on Oct. 21st, 27th, and — 
830th ; and a few were still present on Nov. 3rd. 

T. iliacus, Linn. Redwing.—A very heavy immigration com- 
mencing with the “rush” of Oct. 4th to 9th in small numbers, 
but appearing in great abundance on that of Oct. 17th and 
following days, and lasting until about Nov. 10th. 

T’. plaris, Linn. Fieldfare.—I saw a single bird in a hedge 
near the coast at North Cotes in October, but no more had appeared 
up to Nov. 15th, when I left Lincolnshire. On my return I found 
Fieldfares fairly numerous on Dec. 13th, and very large numbers 
appeared on Dec. 24th and 25th. 

T’. merula, Linn. Blackbird.—Several Blackbirds appeared 
in the neighbourhood of the coast on Oct. 5th, and a much 
larger flight on the 9th. Both these flights consisted of adult 
males and females in about equal numbers. On 17th and 18th 
another very large arrival took place, again consisting of adults 
of both sexes, accompanied, however, on the latter day by a few 
young cocks. On 2ist scores of young black-billed cocks 
appeared with very few hens. Young cocks were still very 
abundant on 27th, with a good many old cocks and a few hens. 


BIRD NOTES FROM N.H. LINCOLNSHIRE. 203 


On 30th many cocks, old and young, but females were more 
numerous than on previous days. On Nov. 8rd swarms of 
Blackbirds, almost all females. Nov. 7th, again many young 
males, and on 10th young cocks abundant, with a few old cocks 
-and hens. On the whole I believe the passage of Blackbirds was 
heavier than usual. 

Saxicola enanthe (Linn.). Wheatear—Wheatears appeared 
very early, and I saw many along the sea-bank on July 29th. I 
Saw no more until Aug. 23rd, when one or two appeared. On 
Sept. Ist and 2nd they were very numerous, and again on 15th. 
On Oct. 4th I noticed a single bird on the sea-bank, and on 5th 
three more stragglers appeared. 

Pratincola rubetra (Linn.). Whinchat.—Numerous on turnip 
fields near the coast on Sept. Ist. On Sept. 11th and 20th, one 
seen each day. 

P. rubicola (Linn.). Stonechat.—A single bird—a female— 
on a hedge in Thoresby Field on Sept. 25th. 

Ruticilla phenicurus (Linn.). Redstart.—A single bird near 
the coast on Sept. 13th. On Oct. 4th and 5th a good many in 
company with Redwings, Pied Flycatchers, Wrens, and many 
other small birds. This is an unusually late date for the passage 
of the Redstart. 

Cyanecula suecica (Linn.). Arctic Bluethroat.—On Oct. 4th 
I shot a young female of this species near the sea-bank in the 
parish of Marshchapel. It is seven years since I last saw a 
Bluethroat on this coast. 

Erithacus rubecula (Linn.). Robin.—A few Robins came in 
on Sept. 9th, but the first important immigration took place on 
Oct. 4th, and a somewhat smaller one between Oct. 17th and 
21st, while a few stragglers remained until the 27th. 

Sylvia cinerea (Bechst.). Whitethroat.——Many Whitethroats 
_ appeared on Aug. 23rd, with Hedge-Sparrows and Willow Wrens. 
Aug. 28th, several in the hedges, and from this date until Sept. 
9th a few were always present; while on Oct. 4th I shot a single 
straggler. 

S. curruca (Linn.). Lesser Whitethroat. — Always a scarce 
bird on migration. I shot one near the coast on Sept. 14th, and 
a second on Oct. 4th. 

S. hortensis (Bechst.). Garden-Warbler. — I shot one on 

P2 


204 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


some thorns near the coast at Tetney on Oct. 18th, an unusually 
late date. 

S. nisoria (Bechst.). Barred Warbler.—On Oct. 17th I shot 
a young female of this species. It was in a thorn-hedge not far 
from the coast at Marshchapel. The weather had been fair and 
bright since the 15th, with light east wind, and white frost at 
night. 

Regulus cristatus, R. L. Koch. Goldcrest. — The Goldcrest 
appeared in very small numbers this year. On Oct. 4th I saw a © 
single bird on a hedge at North Cotes, and this bird remained 
about the same spot until the 138th. On the 17th and 18th 
Goldcrests were thinly scattered everywhere along the coast, 
though by no means numerous. By the 21st only three or four 
remained, and on 27th two only were seen. 

Phylloscopus rufus (Bechst.). Chiffchaff.—I shot a Chiffchaff 
on the very unusual date of Nov. 10th, on a hedge close to 
the coast. 

P. trochtlus (Linn.). Willow-Wren. — A few Willow-Wrens 
appeared on the coast on Aug. 23rd, most of them frequenting 
the larger hedges. On Sept. 9th I shot an example of a small 
race of the Willow-Wren which occasionally occurs on migration. 

P, sibilatrix (Bechst.). Wood-Wren.—I shot a Wood-Wren 
near the coast on Aug. 28th. This bird very rarely occurs on 
passage. 

Acrocephalus phragmitis (Bechst.). Sedge-Warbler. — Last 
seen on Sept. 8th; one shot in a clover field near the sea. 

Locustella nevia (Bodd.). Grasshopper-Warbler.—On Sept. 
14th I shot one of these birds among the long grass in the 
bottom of a hedge near the coast. On 16th I saw another almost 
at the same spot, but failed to shoot it, as it was impossible to 
make it leave covert for more than a few feet at a time. I have 
never seen this species on migration before. 

Accentor modularis (Linn.). Hedge-Sparrow.—The migration 
of this bird commenced just a month earlier than usual. A con- 
siderable number appeared on Aug. 23rd, but almost all left by 
the 28th. On Oct. 4th, and again on the 9th, large immigrations 
took place. 

Parus major, Linn. Great Titmouse.—The passage of both 
the Great and Blue Titmouse proved quite a feature in the 


} 
| 
; 


BIRD NOTES FROM N.E. LINCOLNSHIRE. 205 


migrations of the past autumn. This bird first appeared on Oct. 
5th, and from that date until Nov. 10th was to be found daily in 
the trees and hedges near the coast in considerable numbers. 

‘P. ceruleus, Linn. Blue Titmouse.—Like the last named, 
occurred in great numbers, generally in small parties of from two 
or three to half a dozen frequenting the hedges or the thorn- 
bushes on the drain sides. It appeared earlier than the Great 
Titmouse, two or three coming in on Sept. 14th. I sawno more 
until Oct. 4th, when they were very numerous, and from that 
date to Nov. 10th they were present in the coast district in great 
- abundance. 

P. palustris, Linn. Marsh-Titmouse.—TI saw a Marsh Tit- 
mouse in a hedge by the roadside at Holton-le-Clay on Nov. 
14th, and shot one in Fenby Wood on Dec. 28th. 

Troglodytes parvulus, Koch. Wren. — A few Wrens came in 
on Oct. 4th, and their numbers had increased somewhat on the 
5th. On the 9th they were very abundant everywhere near the 
coast; again on 2lst a good many appeared, and the passage 
finished about the 27th. 

Motacilla lugubris, Temm. Pied Wagtail.—Many young birds 
on grass-land near the coast on Sept. 2nd. Again many on 
Sept. 9th and 11th; on the latter date a few were old males. On 
16th a few, all young birds; and on 20th many, both old and 
young. From this date no more appeared on the coast, but on 
Oct 11th at Wyham, and on 14th at Wold Newton, both on the 
top of the wolds, I observed numbers of Wagtails, both old and 
young, feeding among the sheep, folded on turnips. 

M. melanope, Pall. Grey Wagtail.—A pair of Grey Wagtails 
appeared on Waith Beck on Sept. 24th; Oct. 4th, a single bird 
at one of the fish-ponds at Grainsby, and on 18th several on one 
of the marsh-drains near the coast. 

M. raw (Bonap.). Yellow Wagtail.— One young bird on 
Aug. 9th. Several on Aug. 28th and Sept. 4th. Abundant on 
the 9th, and from this date they became gradually scarcer until 
the 22nd, after which I saw no more. All were young birds. 

Anthus trivialis (Linn.). Tree-Pipit. — One shot in a hedge 
near the sea at North Cotes on Oct. 4th. 

A. pratensis (Linn.). Meadow-Pipit.— I noticed many of 
these Pipits along the sea-bank on Aug. 28th, and again on 


206 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Sept. 2nd. On Sept. 4th their numbers had increased to hundreds 
everywhere near the coast, and the species continued very abun- 
dant until the 20th. 

A. obscurus (Lath.). Rock-Pipit.—Two or three Rock-Pipits 
appeared on the foreshore at North Cotes on Sept. 22nd. A 
considerable immigration on Oct. 4th, and a still greater one 
on 17th. , 

Muscicapa atricapilla, Linn. Pied Flycatcher.—Three Pied 
Flycatchers came in with the “ rush” of small birds on Oct. 4th 
—the only ones seen during the autumn. 

M. grisola, Linn. Spotted Flycatcher.— The majority of 
these birds left about the second week of September, but I saw 
half a dozen in the garden at Grainsby on the 24th. 

Hirundo rustica, Linn. Swallow. — Thousands roosting in 
the reed-beds on Madams Crike on Sept. 4th. Swallows became 
scarce about Oct. 9th, but I saw three or four flying over the 
village of Tetney on the 18th. 

Chelidon urbica (Linn.). House-Martin. — A House-Martin 
flying about the house at Grainsby on Noy. 5th. | 

Ligurinus chloris (Linn.). Greenfinch.— A good many near 
the coast on Oct. 13th, and very abundant from the 17th to 
the 30th. 

Carduelis elegans, Steph. Goldfinch.—Very scarce; one on 
the sea-bank on Nov. 10th. 

Passer domesticus (Linn.). House-Sparrow. — Very large 
flocks in the hedges near the coast on Oct. 5th, and again 
on 2lst. 

Fringilla celebs, Linn. Chaffinch.—A large flock at Grainsby 
on Oct. 15th. On 17th many—apparently all males—about the 
sea-bank and neighbouring hedges. 

F. montifringilla, Linn. Brambling.—One (a female) on a 
hedge near the sea on Oct. 4th. T'wo, both females, at Grainsby 
on Oct. llth. A considerable number in a mixed flock of Lin- 
nets, Greenfinches, and Twites on Dec. 20th. 

Linota cannabina (Linn.). Linnet.—- Many on grass-land 
near the coast on Sept. 15th. Large mixed flocks of Lin- 
nets and T'wites on the North Cotes foreshore on Oct. 9th 
and 18th. 

L. flavirostris (Linn.). Twite.—Many small flocks along the 


BIRD NOTES FROM N.H. LINCOLNSHIRE. 207 


shore on Oct. 5th, and on 9th and 18th very abundant, associating 
with Linnets on the foreshore. 

Emberiza citrinella, Linn. Yellowhammer.— Many small 
flocks in the vicinity of the coast on Dec. 20th. 

E. scheniclus, Linn. Reed-Bunting.—One on a hedge near 
the sea-bank on Oct. 18th, and on 21st a good many, both on the 
hedgerows and among the weeds on the “ fitties.” 

Plectrophenax nivalis (Linn.). Snow-Bunting.— A most in- 
significant migration; only two or three single young birds on 
the sands at Marshchapel on Nov. 38rd. 

Sturnus vulgaris, Linn. Starling.—Huge flocks of Starlings 

on Tetney “fitties”’ and land adjoining on Oct. 4th, and again 
on 9th. On Oct. 17th thousands passing in from the sea 
to north-west until about 2.30 «p.m. in long straggling flocks. 
On 2lst an immense flock came in from the sea about half- 
past four in the afternoon, and passed inland to south-west. 
By this date there were millions of these birds on the coast 
marshes. 

Garrulus glandarius (Linn,). Jay.— There was probably 
some immigration of Jays about the end of September, as on 
28th of that month I noticed many flocks of these birds, some of 
them numbering over a dozen individuals, about the hedgerows 
at Grainsby. I have not permitted the destruction of Jays for 
many years, and they are now very abundant here, so that 
possibly these flocks were local birds. I have never met with the 
Jay actually on the coast. 

Corvus monedula, Linn. Jackdaw.—A very slight immigra- 
tion. On Oct. 21st I saw four Jackdaws among a flock of Rooks 
coming in from the sea, and going north-west, and on the 3Uth a 
few on grass-land near the coast. 

C. corone, Linn. Carrion Crow. — On Sept. 18th a Carrion- 
Crow on North Cotes “‘fitties,” and on 14th three in the same 
place. Very abundant in the winter; I saw over a hundred 
come to roost in Autby Wood in the evening of Dec. 29th. 
~  C. corniz, Linn. Grey Crow.—First Grey Crow seen on 
Oct 3rd, on 9th two, and one each day on 11th and 18th. Many 
passing north-west over Tetney village on 16th. On 17th flocks 
of Grey Crows coming in from the sea, and going north-west 
until about 2.30 p.m.; afterwards single birds until sunset. On 


208 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


21st a few coming in, and travelling north-west singly, or two or 
three together. 

C. frugilegus, Linn. Rook.—A few coming in with Grey 
Crows, and going north-west on Oct. 17th. Oct. 21st, small — 
parties coming in until about four o'clock. The morning was ~ 
foggy, and the Rooks were only visible through occasional breaks 
in the mist; but the flocks appeared to be going south-west. In 
the afternoon the fog cleared, and all the Rooks went to north- 
west. On 30th a few coming in and going west. On Nov. Ist 
hundreds passing over Grainsby to west all day until dusk, and 
on 7th a few coming in until 2.30 p.m. 

Alauda arvensis, Linn. Sky-Lark.—A very slight visible 
immigration. A few small flocks coming in on Oct. 9th, and 
going south-west until two o’clock. Again on 17th small parties 
coming in, some going north-west, others south-west. On 21st 
Larks were very abundant on the stubbles both inland and near 
the coast, and small flocks were going north-west, and about the 
same number on Nov. 7th. On Dec. 24th, 25th, and 27th 
straggling flocks were passing north-west over Grainsby in the 
morning, but on the last-named day a few of the flocks went 
south. | 

Cypselus apus (Linn.). Swift. — Several near the coast on 
Sept. 4th. 

Alcedo ispida, Linn. Kingfisher. — Unusually numerous on 
the drains and sluices near the coast, particularly on Sept. 8th, 
14th, and Oct. 18th. The first one was seen on Aug. 28th. 

Cuculus canorus. Linn. Cuckoo.—Very few appeared on the 
coast, and all young birds. I saw one on Sept. 1st, two on 4th, 
and one on 6th. One of those seen on the 4th belonged to the 
red form. 

Strix flammea, Linn. Barn-Owl.— On the evening of Oct. 
Ist I saw an example of this very unusual migrant near the coast 
at Tetney. 

Asio otus (Linn.). Long-eared Owl.—I saw a Long-eared 
Owl perched in a low bush near the lifeboat-house at Donna 
Nook on Oct. 18th. 

A. accipitrinus (Pall.). Short-eared Owl. — About the last 
week of August I saw, at a birdstuffer’s shop in Grimsby, a 
freshly-skinned Owl of this species, which had been caught on 


BIRD NOTES FROM N.E. LINCOLNSHIRE. 209 


board ship about one hundred miies off the Humber. On Oct. 
17th one among North Cotes sand-hills. Oct. 30th, one on the 
sea-bank, and on Nov. 7th one in a turnip field near the coast. 

Buteo vulgaris, Leach. Common Buzzard.—On Oct. 14th a 
very dark coloured Buzzard passed over the wolds at Beesby at a 
- great height. 
 B. lagopus. Rough-legged Buzzard. — On Dec. 24th one of 
these birds passed over me at Grainsby, almost within gun-shot. 

Accipiter nisus (Linn.). Sparrow-Hawk.—A few young birds 
in the hedges and along the sea-bank at North Cotes on Sept. 
22nd. On Oct. 17th one or two, and on 2list many Sparrow- 
Hawks along the coast. On Dec. 29th Sparrow-Hawks were 
exceedingly abundant; I saw over a dozen at Grainsby in about 
an hour in the morning, and many came in to roost in Autby 
Wood at night. 

Falco peregrinus, Tunst. Peregrine.—On Dec. 29th a Pere- 
grine flying over Fenby Wood in the morning, and another, or 
perhaps the same bird, in the afternoon. Dec. 30th, one .at 
Grainsby. 

F.. esalon, Tunst. Merlin.—A little cock Merlin in the cow 
marsh at Tetney on Oct. 16th, and a young female at Grainsby 
on Dec. 24th. 

F. tinnunculus, Linn. Kestrel.—Two or three Kestrels about 
the sea-bank on July 29th, and a good many on Sept. 4th and 
22nd; and two or three each day on Oct. 17th and 21st. 

Ardea cinerea, Linn. Heron.—Several Herons, all immature 
birds, appeared on the creeks at Tetney on July 29th. 

Anser brachyrhynchus, Baill. Pink-footed Goose. — First 
flocks seen on Oct. 4th. During the severe weather on Dec. 13th 
and 14th the coastguards at North Cotes reported many Grey 
Geese on the coast. 

Anas boscas, Linn. Mallard.—Thousands of Ducks were seen 
going up the Humber by coastguards and others on Dec. 14th, 
soon after the commencement of severe weather. 

Spatula clypeata (Linn.). Shoveler.—One shot at Tetney on 
Sept. lst was probably ahome-bred bird. 

Nettion crecca (Linn.). Teal. — Not so numerous on the 
“crikes” at Tetney as usual. A few appeared on July 29th, and 
a good many on Aug. 16th, 


210 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Mareca penelope (Linn.). Wigeon.— One shot at Tetney on 
Sept. Ist. 

Columba enas, Linn. Stock-Dove.— Two small flocks at 
Grainsby on Nov. 4th and 5th. On 7th I shot a young bird close 
to the sea-bank at Tetney, and on Dec. 30th I shot four out of a 
flock of about one hundred of these little Pigeons. 

Turtur communis, Selby. Turtle-Dove.—I shot a young 
Turtle-Dove from a hedge near the sea at North Cotes on 
Sept. 29th. 

Crex pratensis, Bechst. Corn-Crake. — Last saw one in a 
turnip field at Cadeby on Oct. I1th. 

Porzana maruetta (Leach). Spotted Crake. — On Oct. 4th I 
shot a Spotted Crake at Tetney. 

Rallus aquaticus, Linn. Water-Rail.— First appeared near 
the coast on Oct. 27th, when I shot one at Tetney. 

Charadrius pluvialis, Linn. Golden Plover. — On Oct. 4th I 
shot a couple of young birds—the first seen on North Cotes 
sands. Oct. 5th, several flocks of forty or fifty birds each on the 
sands. Very abundant on Oct. 9th; many flocks of from fifty to 
several hundred birds each on the sands and land near the sea. 
Again on 21st and 30th great numbers on the coast. On the 
latter day I killed eight out of one of the flocks, and found both 
old and young birds among them. 

Squatarola helvetica (Linn.). Grey Plover.—A few on the 
coast on Sept. 2nd. On 14th a good many, all adults in full 
breeding dress. On Oct. 13th a great immigration of young 
birds all along the coast. 

Vanellus vulgaris, Bechst. Peewit.—Very little visible migra- 
tion, and Peewits appear less numerous in the district than usual. 
Small parties going west on Oct. 9th until about 2.80 p.m. ; some 
large flocks on the coast with Golden Plover on the same day. 
Again, on Nov. 10th many flocks coming in, and going to north- 
west. On Dec. 11th—the second day of the hard weather—the 
gainekeepers reported large flocks of Peewits going south over 
Grainsby. 

Strepsilas interpres (Linn.). Turnstone.—A couple of young 
birds on North Cotes sands on Sept. 138th. 

Hematopus ostralegus, Linn. Seapie.—A large flock appeared 
on T'etney Sands on Sept. 2nd. 


BIRD NOTES FROM N.E. LINCOLNSHIRE. 211 


Phalaropus hyperboreus (Linn.). Red-necked Phalarope.— 
A Red-necked Phalarope was netted by one of the Plover-catchers 
on Oct. 12th at North Cotes, and sent to me. 

Scolopax rusticula, Linn. Woodcock.—The first flight came 
in on Oct. 19th, and another and apparently much larger flight 
on Nov. 10th. An unusually large number of Woodcocks were 
present in the coverts about Christmas, and it is probable that a 
third immigration took place about the beginning of the frost 
which commenced on Dec. 10th, as I shot one in Waith fen, a long 
way from any wood, on the 138th. 

Gallinago major (Gmel.). Great Snipe.—One sent to me by 
one of the Plover-catchers, which he shot on Oct. 3rd close to 
the village of North Cotes. ’ 

G. celestis (Frenz.). Common Snipe. — The first flight of 
migrating Snipes appeared on Oct. 30th, when I found many in 
the neighbourhood of the coast at Tetney. On Nov. 7th a second 
immigration took place, but on both occasions they were exceed- 
ingly wild, and I killed very few. 

G. gallinula (Linn.). Jack-Snipe.— A couple of Jacks ap- 
peared on Sept. 29th, and a considerable number on Oct. 27th. 

Tringa alpina, Linn. Dunlin.—A few on the sands on July 
29th. Have been scarcer than usual all the season. 

T’. minuta, Leis]. Little Stint. — Very scarce; one caught 
by a Plover-catcher at North Cotes on Sept. 28th was the only 
one I saw during the autumn. 

T. subarquata (Giuld.). Curlew-Sandpiper.—I saw a party of 
four on the shore at Marshchapel on Sept. 18th. 

T. canutus, Linn. Knot.— Scarce in the early part of the 
season. On Oct. 4th there were some large flocks on North 
Cotes sands, and on 17th thousands of Knot appeared. 

Calidris arenaria (Linn.). Sanderling.—Scarce ; three on the 
sands near Saltfleet on Sept. 2nd. 

Machetes pugnax (Linn.). Ruff.— First seen on Aug. 16th, 
asingle Ruff near Tetney Lock. On Sept. 11th a Reeve on a 
fresh-water creek near the coast, and on the 20th a Ruff on the 
sea-bank at high water. 

Totanus hypoleucus (Linn.). Common Sandpiper. — A few 
appeared on July 29th, and were fairly numerous up to the middle 
of September on the sides of the marsh-drains. Last seen—a 
single bird—on Oct. 5th. 


212 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


T. glareola (Gmel.). _Wood-Sandpiper.—On July 29th I saw © 
a Wood-Sandpiper on the side of Madams Crike, near Tetney 
Lock. It was very tame, and allowed me to watch it within 
ten yards. 

T. ochropus (Linn.). Green Sandpiper.—First seen on July 
29th, in company with the Wood-Sandpiper, but these birds were 
very wild, rising out of gunshot. Numerous on the marsh-drains 
throughout August and September. 

T. fuscus (Linn.). Spotted Redshank.—One of the Plover- 
catchers sent me three immature Spotted Redshanks, caught by 
his son on Sept. lst at Tetney on one of his Plover-pools. On 
Sept. 14th this same man sent me another—also a young bird— 
which he had caught on his Plover-decoy at North Cotes; and, 
finally, a fifth, caught at the same place on Sept. 28th. He told 
me that he believed all these birds were part of a flock of six 
which he had seen late in August. 

T’. canescens (Gmel.). Greenshank.—One or two on Tetney 
‘*fitties”’ on July 29th, a very early date. Last seen, a single 
bird on Sept. 16th. 

Numenius arquata (Linn.). Curlew. —I saw two or three | 
Curlews on July 29th on North Cotes sands. On Aug. 23rd they 
were numerous, and continued so through the autumn. 

N. pheopus (Linn.). Whimbrel.—First seen on July 29th, 
and a few were present until the middle of September, but in 
unusually small numbers. 

Hydrochelidon nigra (Linn.). Black Tern.—A young bird of 
this species was shot at North Cotes by one of the Plover-catchers, 
and sent to me about the middle of October. : 

Sterna macrura, Naum. Arctic 'Tern.— Terns were excep- 
tionally scarce this autumn. On Sept. 2nd I saw a few small 
parties of this species at Saltfleet and Donna Nook. 

Podicipes fluviatilis (Tunst.). Little Grebe. — A couple of 
young birds on North Cotes sluice on Oct. 18th. On 27th an old 
bird in breeding plumage on a fresh-water creek near the coast. 


( 218 ) 


ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF SOME BIRDS OB- 
SERVED IN IRELAND AND IN SWITZERLAND. 


By Cuarues J. Parren, B.A., M.D. (Chief Demonstrator in 
Anatomy, Dublin University), and W. J. WiLuraMs. 


Tuat the large majority of birds are widely distributed over 
the face of the globe is a fact now well ascertained. Their 
migratory propensities, which seem to be the rule rather than 
the exception, account largely for their geographical distribution. 
But it does not necessarily follow from this that certain species 
are equally plentiful in different countries; for example, the Red- 
start is decidedly rare in Ireland, whereas in many parts of the 
Continent it is quite a plentiful bird. EHven in the same country 
a bird may be common in one province, and unknown in another. 
Thus, in Kilkenny and Queen ’sCounty the Jay is often seen, 
whereas it is practically absent from Louth and Dublin. 

These facts concerning distribution are highly important to 
those who may wish to determine the absolute rarity of birds, a 
matter which every collector should consider before attempting 
to diminish their numbers. A non-breeding casual migratory 
species, seldom occurring in the British Isles, but common and 
widely distributed in other countries, cannot in any sense be con- 
Sidered a really rare bird. It is only relatively so, and in the 
cause of science it seems quite allowable to capture such a 
Species provided that the scientist wishes to advance his know- 
ledge of ornithology. By such a procedure he will not materially 
lessen the numbers of the species, and moreover he will obtain 
reliable evidence of the occurrence of a so-called rare native bird. 
The present article has been written with the view of supporting 
this idea. The occurrences of different kinds of birds (as many 
as possible) inhabiting both Ireland and Switzerland are in the 
first place recorded. Their variation in numbers in the two 
countries (the question of relative rarity) is then compared. But 
In all cases one must not expect the numbers to sensibly vary. 


214 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Some birds are equally common to both countries. A _ brief 
notice of these will probably suffice. 

It should be borne in mind that the observations set down in 
this paper were chiefly made during a few tours through the: 
alpine scenery of Switzerland; hill, dale, and large inland lakes — 
being the nature of the greater part of the country traversed. 
Hence the following list treats of land birds for the most part, 
such as those found in the orders of Accipitres and Passeres. By 
far the greater number of birds recorded belong to the latter 
order. Still, the presence of large inland lakes (Geneva, 
Lucerne, &c.) one would almost think should have afforded suit- 
able ‘‘natural habitat” for some fresh-water aquatic birds belong- 
ing to the orders of Limicole and Natatores, such as the Common 
Sandpiper and Coot; and, indeed, the absence of these and others 
of the same class appears somewhat remarkable.* 

As we should naturally expect, the habits of a given species 
found in Ireland differed but little from the same found in 
Switzerland. If anything, the continental birds on the whole 
appeared rather the tamer of the two. As in Ireland, so in 
Switzerland, the birds of the mountainous districts showed a 
more marked tendency to shyness than those frequenting the 
towns and the vicinity of human habitations. 

The plumage of a species common to the two countries seemed 
practically identical. ‘To this there are a few exceptions, which 
will be referred to when dealing with the bird in question. 

In order to render the subject-matter of this article more 
complete, and to endeavour to add to its interest, the authors 
have deemed it advisable to very briefly refer to the general 
geographical distribution of each species mentioned, in addition 
to its occurrence in Switzerland and Ireland. 

Finally, before drawing up this list of birds, it is important to 
mention that the observations were made during short visits to 
the Continent in the summers of 1897, 1898, 1899. Each visit 
only lasted three weeks ; but, when added together, they extended 
over the greater parts of July, August, and September. For this 
reason it is obvious that the numbers of birds which were noticed 
were no doubt proportionately small. Instead of this, had the 
visits extended into one of longer duration, lasting continuously 


* Itis ikely that both Coot and Waterhen were overlooked. 


SOME BIRDS IN IRELAND AND SWITZERLAND. 215 


for three months, then a fuller avifauna of the Swiss birds would 
have been furnished. Inasmuch as all observations were made 
in summer, it was not possible to compare the relative differ- 
ences in the numbers of the winter visitants common to the two 
countries. 


Order ACCIPITRES. 


Accipiter nisus, Linn. Sparrow-Hawk.*—Somewhat uncom- 
mon.{t Was observed for the most part in the valley of Chamonix. 
Common throughout Ireland. In the Swiss form the stripes on 
the breast are more defined, and, according to M. Gerbe,{ there 
is a local species found in Switzerland and in Germany (A. major) 
larger in size, and the bands on the feathers of the tail are darker 
and more numerous. Other minor differences also exist. 

General distribution.—Common in every country in Europe, 
in many parts of Asia, China, Kast Africa, and India. 

Milvus ictinus, Sav. Kite.— Three were noticed soaring 
over Lake Geneva on different occasions. They came under 
close observation, and, with the aid of a powerful binocular, their 
forked tails—a characteristic feature—could be distinguished. 
In this way the species was easily identified. Extremely rare in 
Ireland. According to the late A. G. More,§ it has only been 
observed five or six times. ‘The specimen obtained by Sir R. 
Payne Gallwey || seems as yet to be the only one known. This 
was shot in 1880-1881 on the Cashen river, in Kerry. The 
writer describes the bird as flying “in swooping and almost wing- 
motionless curves, the tail first slanted this way, ee that, as it 
acted rudder to the bird’s flight.” 

General distribution. — Common in most parts of Europe 
south of Norway to the Mediterranean. According to Yarrell,4 
the Kite does not breed north of lat. 61°. It occurs also in 
Egypt, Palestine, Algeria, and the Canaries. 


* It was curious that the common Kestrel was not observed. 

+ In the following list it must be understood that the occurrence of the 
birds in Switzerland is noted in each case before their occurrence in 
Ireland. 

} Revised edition of ‘Ornithologie Huropéenne’ of the late Dr. Degland. 

§ ‘ List of Irish Birds,’ 1890, p. 6. 

|| ‘ Fowler in Ireland,’ p. 307. 

{| ‘ British Birds,’ vol. i. p. 96. 


216 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Buteo vulgaris, Leach. Common Buzzard. — Numerous in 
the pine forests of Lucerne, Chamonix, and Grindelwald. A 
Buzzard was constantly to be seen soaring over Lake Lucerne, 
rising to a great height, and then descending almost to the 
surface of the water, after the fashion of an Osprey when in 
search of fish. In Ireland the Buzzard has been rapidly de- 
creasing of late years, and is now very rare. It formerly bred in 
Donegal, Londonderry, Antrim, and Down.* One was observed 
on June 4th, 1889, at Powerscourt Waterfall, Co. Wicklow, by 
Dr. C. J. Patten. Sir W. Jardine describes the Buzzard as 
‘“‘a fine accompaniment to the landscape, whether sylvan or wild 
and rocky.” 

General distribution. — Inhabits the greater part of the 
Kuropean continent. Breeds in Sweden as high north as lat. 
66°. Plentiful in Palestine in winter. Occurs also in North 
Africa, and rarely in Egypt. The American Buzzard is a 
different species. 

Asio accipitrinus, Pall. Short-eared Owl.—One was noticed 
in the valley of Grindelwald in July, 1897. On account of its 
occurring at this time of year it probably bred there. In Ireland 
this species is a regular winter visitor in limited numbers, 
migrating before the breeding season. 

General distribution.— Widely distributed and migratory in 
its habits. At one season or another it frequents the whole of 
Kurope and the greater part of Asia (China, India, Palestine, 
and Egypt), Algeria, and Morocco. It is also found in many 
parts of South America. In North America it is a summer 
visitant. Mr. Darwin met with it in the Falklands. 


Order PASSEREs. 


Lanius collurio, Linn.  Red-backed Shrike. — Many were 
observed in Lucerne, Basle, and neighbouring districts in Switzer- 
land. In Basle this bird was often seen perched on the posts 
which supported the vines grown in the open air. It also fre- 
quently alighted on the telegraph-wires. In Ireland this species 
1s excessively rare.t Only one specimen has been recorded, viz. 

. * “ Report on the Breeding Range of Birds in Ireland ” (Proc. Royal 
Irish Acad. 3rd series, vol. iii. No. 3, 1894), by R. J. Ussher. 


; s1 In as of England and Wales it is a tolerably common summer 
visitor (see Saunders, ‘ Manual of British Birds,’ 1899). 


SOME BIRDS IN IRELAND AND SWITZERLAND. 217 


that shot on the 10th August, 1878, near Belfast (Zool. 1878, 
p. 437). 

General distribution.*—In summer it is frequent throughout 
the Continent of Europe, exceptin the south-westerly region. In 
Spain itis rare. It breeds as high north as lat. 64°. It is also 
found in Palestine and North Africa, and in winter its migration 
extends to Natal and Cape Colony. 

Muscicapa grisola, Linn. Spotted Flycatcher. — Common 


summer migrant in both Switzerland and Ireland. 


General distribution. — Frequents the greater parts of the 
continents of Kurope, Asia, and North Africa in summer. Visits 
India, Arabia, and South Africa in the winter. 

Cinclus aquaticus, Bechst. Dipper.— Common, especially 
along the mountain rivulets of Davos Platz and Chamonix. The 
pale-backed subspecies (C. albicollis), which inhabits the Alps 
and Southern Europe, was not noticed. Common and generally 
distributed throughout Ireland. 

General distribution.— Cinclus aquaticus is frequent in Central 
Kurope, but in the northern parts its place is taken by the dark- 
breasted form (C. melanogaster). The Dipper also frequents 
many parts of Central Asia. Subject to continental variation. 

Turdus viscivorus (Linn.). Mistle-Thrush.— Common in 
Switzerland, especially in Chamonix. Also common in Ireland. 

General distribution.—Distributed over the European conti- 
nent, breeding from north to south. Found in many parts of 
Asia as a resident, and in winter migrates to North India, Persia, 
and North Africa. 

T. musicus, Linn. Song Thrush.—Common and widely dis- 
tributed in both Switzerland and Ireland. 

General distribution.—Resident over the greater part of the 
European and Asiatic continents. Many migrate in the winter to 


Northern Africa and Western Asia. 


T. merula, Liun. Blackbird. — Seemed somewhat scarce in 
Switzerlandin summer. Mostly observed at Interlaken. Common 
and resident in Ireland. 

General distribution.—Like the Song Thrush, it is resident 
Over the greater part of the European continent, but does not 

* For details, see O. V. Aplin (Trans. Norf. and Nor. Nat. Soe. v. pp. 286 
to 310). 
Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., May, 1400. Q 


218 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


extend far east in Asia. Breeds as high north as lat. 67° in 
Norway. Many migrate in the winter to southern countries 
like the Song-Thrush. 

Erithacus rubecula, Linn. Redbreast; ‘ Robin.” —Common in 
Switzerland and in Ireland. Much wilder in the former country. 

General distribution.—Resembles the former species in its 
breeding distribution, but not extending east of Russia. Many 
migrate in winter as far south as Central Africa and Western Asia. 

Ruticilla phenicurus, Linn. Redstart.—Common in most 
parts of Switzerland, approaching close to human habitation. 
Very rare in Ireland. Has been found breeding in counties of 
Wicklow* and Tyrone.t Frequently taken at lighthouses when 
migrating in spring and autumn.{ 

General distribution.—In Europe from the North Cape to 
the south of the Continent, migrating in winter to the northern 
parts of Africa, Arabia, and Persia. The Asiatic form (R. meso- 
lewca) differs from the European species in that it possesses a 
white patch on the wing. 

R. titys, Scop. Black Redstart—Abundant in many parts of 
Switzerland, where it breeds. Rather rare, but regular winter 
visitor to Ireland. 

General distribution. — Common in Germany and Southern 
Kurope, where it is resident. Its eastern range extends to Asia 
Minor and Palestine; in winter to Nubia (Saunders). 

Saxicola rubetra, Linn. Whinchat.—Plentiful in many parts 
of Switzerland, especially Chamonix, Davos Platz, Grindelwald, 
and Lucerne. In Ireland it occurs as a summer visitor, but 
rather scarce and local. According to Ussher§ it breeds in 
Donegal, Antrim, Down, Armagh, Tyrone, Fermanagh, Longford, 
Louth, Dublin,|| Kilkenny, Mayo, Sligo, and Leitrim. 

General distribution.— Breeds over the greater part of the 


* Benson on ‘Irish Song Birds,’ p. 53. 

+ R. J. Ussher, ‘Report on Breeding Range of Birds in Ireland ”’ (Proc. 
Royal Irish Acad. 3rd series, vol. iii. No. 3). 

i ‘List of Irish Birds,’ by A. G. More, p. 10. 

§ “ Report on Breeding Range of Birds in Ireland” (Proc. Royal Irish 
Acad. 3rd series, vol. iii. No. 8). 

|| The authors have often observed this bird in Co. Dublin, and twice 


have secured specimens in nesting and adult plumage. These are in Dr. 
Patten’s collection. 


Af 


SOME BIRDS IN IRELAND AND SWITZERLAND. 219 


European continent as high north as lat. 70° in Scandinavia. It 
winters in Africa, Asia Minor, and Northern India. Occurs as 
far east as the Ural Mountains in Russia. 

Sylvia rufa, Bodd. Greater Whitethroat.—Frequent in many 
parts of Switzerland, and common summer visitor to Ireland. 

General distribution.—Over the greater part of Europe. Resi- 
dent in Palestine (Saunders). Summer migrant in Asia Minor. 
Winters in North Africa, Egypt, Abyssinia, and Arabia. Extends 
farther east than the Whinchat. 

S. atricapilla, Linn. Blackcap.—Common in many parts of 
Switzerland. Visits Ireland every summer, but in small num- 
bers. Breeds regularly in Dublin, Wicklow, Kildare, and Queen’s 
County (Ussher). This bird has been observed by Dr. Patten in 
the winter (February, 1890) at Bray, Co. Wicklow (‘ Naturalists’ 
Gazette’ for 1890). 

' General distribution.— Widely distributed over Europe, North 
Africa, and parts of Asia as a breeder. Migrates in winter to 
Abyssinia and the Red Sea. 

Phylloscopus trochilus, Linn. Willow Warbler.—Common in 
Ireland and Switzerland as a summer visitor. 

General distribution. — Over Europe and eastward to the 
Caucasus, where it breeds. Winters in lat. South of France, 
reaching as far as Cape Colony. 

P. collybita (Vieill.). Chiffchaff.— Common in Switzerland 
and in Ireland in the summer. 

General distribution.—Resembles that of the last species, but 
extends farther north in Kurope. Widely distributed in winter 
in the Southern Hemisphere. 

Regulus cristatus (Koch). Golden-crested Wren.— Common 
in Switzerland and Ireland. | 

General distribution.—Over Europe, South-west Asia, and 
Northern Africa. Extends east to the Ural Mountains. 

Certhia familiaris, Linn. Tree Creeper.—Common in Switzer- 
land and Ireland in woody districts. 

General distribution.—In most parts of EKurope, being abun- 
dant in the conifer woods of Norway. Reaches as far south as 
Japan and China. Occurs eastward as far as Siberia. The North 
American forms are somewhat different. 

Parus major, Linn. Great Titmouse.—Common in Switzer- 
land and Ireland. Q2 


220 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


General distribution.—Plentiful over the whole of Europe, 
North Africa, and South-western Asia. 

P. ater, Linn. Coal Titmouse.— Generally distributed in 
Switzerland, Ireland, and elsewhere, like the last species. (For 
variations in foreign forms, see Saunders, ‘ British Birds,’ 1899.) 

P. ceruleus, Linn. Blue Titmouse. — Appeared somewhat 
scarce in Switzerland. Observed mostly at Berne. Common in © 
Ireland. ; 

General distribution.—Including the many continental varie- 
ties, it is widely distributed over Europe, parts of Asia, and North 
Africa. 

P. palustris, Linn. Marsh-Titmouse.—One of the commonest — 
species in Switzerland. Very rareinIreland. (For its occurrence 
see ‘ List of Irish Birds,’ 1890, by the late A. G. More.) 

General distribution.—Resembles the last species, but rare 
in Southern Italy and Greece. Subject to continental variation. 

Acredula caudata, Linn. Long-tailed Titmouse. — Common 
in Switzerland and in Ireland. The Swiss form appeared lighter 
in colour. , 

General distribution. — Including continental forms, it is 
widely distributed over Kurope, Asia, and North Africa. 

Motacilla lugubris (Temm.). Pied Wagtail.— Common in 
Switzerland and Ireland. 

General distribution.—Almost restricted to the western por- 
tion of the Kuropean continent. 

M. alba, Linn. White Wagtail.— Common in Switzerland. 
Very rare summer visitor in Ireland. For its occurrences in 
the latter country, see (a) ‘ List of Irish Birds,’ by the late A. G. 
More, 1890; (b) Dublin Nat. Hist. Proce. vol. iii. p. 1153 (¢) 
‘Zoologist,’ 1866 ; (d) Thompson (‘ Birds of Ireland’); (e) ‘Irish 
Naturalist,’ vols. vii. and vili.; (f) Howard Saunders, ‘ Manual,’ 
p.- 124. A fine specimen, recently obtained (April 27th, 1899) 
at Bartragh, Co. Mayo, by A. C. Kirkwood, is in the collection 
of Dr. Patten. 

General distribution.—Over the whole of Europe and Northern 
Asia; also Asia Minor, Palestine, and North Africa. 

M. sulphurea, Bechst. Grey Wagtail. — Tolerably frequent 
in Switzerland and Ireland, and resident in both countries. 

General distribution.—Common and resident in the central 


SOME BIRDS IN IRELAND AND SWITZERLAND. 221 


and southern portions of Europe. Rare in Northern Germany 
(Saunders). Breeds also in Northern Africa. Summer migrant 
in many parts of Asia, and winter visitor to South Africa and the 
_ Indo-Malayan Islands. 

M. ravi (Bonap.). Yellow Wagtail.—Observed in Switzerland 
on different occasions. Rather rare summer visitor to Ireland, 
and locally distributed. Breeds ‘in the basin of Lough Neagh 
both in Antrim and Armagh” (R. J. Ussher). In Dublin (E. 
Williams). In Galway (Lord Liiford, recorded by R. J. Ussher). 
Near Loughs Mask and Carra, in Mayo (R. Warren). 

General distribution.—Regular summer visitor to Western 
Kurope, 2.e. west of Belgium. Extends south to West Africa. 
The Hastern Asiatic species is distinct. : 

Alauda arvensis, Linn. Sky-Lark.—Appeared rather scarce 
in Switzerland, but probably was overlooked. Was heard in full 
song in Chamonix, July, 1897. Common resident in Ireland. 

General distribution.—Throughout Europe and parts of Asia 
in the summer, but in autumn moves southwards. Winters in 
the central and southern portions of Asia and Africa. Found also 
in the United States, Australia, and New Zealand (Saunders). 

Emberiza citrinella (Linn.). . Yellow Bunting.—Common and 
resident in Switzerland and Ireland. 

General distribution. — Widely distributed in Temperate 
Kurope as resident. Occurs in Asia Minor and Palestine. The 
bird found in the latter country is somewhat distinct. 

Fringilla celebs, Linn. Chaffinch. — Abundant in Switzer- 
land and Ireland as resident. 

General distribution.—Occurs plentifully all the year round 
throughout Temperate Europe. Breeds also in the east and 
north-east of Asia, as well as Persia. Winters in many parts of 
Northern Africa. Foreign forms are subject to variation. 

Passer montanus, Linn. Tree-Sparrow.—Observed at Lucerne 
in small numbers. Rare and local in Ireland, where it breeds. 
Unknown to the latter country prior to 1852 (Saunders). A 
young specimen from Crumlin, Co. Dublin,* is in Dr. Patten’s 
collection. It was obtained on Aug. 4th, 1898. For the chief 
occurrences of this species in Ireland, see ‘ List of Irish Birds,’ 


* Its breeding range in Co. Dublin is extending. Prior to 1898 it was 
only supposed to breed near Baldoyle and Raheny. 


2:22, THE ZOOLOGIST. 


by the late A. G. More, p. 14; also H. M. Wallis in ‘ Zoologist,’ 
1886, p. 489. Apparently breeds only in the Co. Dublin 
(Ussher). ae 

General distribution.—Distributed throughout Europe and 
the greater part of Asia. Has been obtained from North America 
as an importation. 

P. domesticus, Linn. House-Sparrow.—Numerous in Switzer- 
land and in Ireland. In Lucerne this bird was noticeably tame, 
especially about the cafés chantants, where it might be seen 
picking crumbs, &c., from under the tables at which the tourists 
were enjoying their repast. 

General distribution.—Numerous throughout Europe and the 
greater part of Asia, and North, Western, and Central Africa. 
Plentiful in Australia, New Zealand, and the United States, 
where it has been introduced. 

Carduelis elegans, Steph. Goldfinch.—Frequent and gener- 
ally distributed throughout many parts of Switzerland and 
Treland. 

General distribution.—Breeds throughout Europe; rare in 
the north. Very abundant in Spain (Saunders). Also resident 
in many parts of North Africa. Winter visitor to Egypt and 
Persia. 

Serinus hortulanus, Koch. Serin.—Was observed frequently 
on the Wengern Alp, Grindelwald: also at Chamonix and Davos 
Platz. Extremely rare in Ireland. One was obtained near 
Dublin on Jan. 2nd, 1893 (Saunders’s ‘ British Birds,’ 1899, 
p.- 177). The Serin is in Switzerland one of the wildest of 
passerine birds, and therefore somewhat difficult to observe. 

General distribution.—Found throughout the greater part of 
Central and Southern Europe, and on both sides of the Medi- 
terranean. According to Saunders, it is resident and extremely 
abundant in Asia Minor. Visits in winter other parts of Western 
and South-western Asia. This species has been introduced into 
North America (United States). 

Chrysomitris spinus, Linn, Siskin.—Frequent in many places 
in Switzerland. Not uncommon in Ireland, but rather locally 
distributed as a resident. According to Ussher* it breeds in 


* “Report on the Breeding Range of Birds in Ireland’’ (Proc. Royal 
Irish Acad, 38rd series, vol, ili. No. 8, 1894). 


SOME BIRDS IN IRELAND AND SWITZERLAND. 223 


Donegal, Down, Armagh, Fermanagh, Dublin, Wicklow, Wexford, 
Waterford, Cork ?, Kerry ?. 

General distribution.—Resident throughout the greater part 
of Europe, migrating in winter across the Mediterranean to North 
Africa. Also found in Western and South-western Asia. In 
India a different species exists (C. spinoides). 

Pyrrhula europea (Vieill.). Bullfinch.k—Common and resi- 
dent in Switzerland and Ireland. The large form with the very 
brilliant red breast (P. major), which inhabits Northern and Eastern 


Europe, was noticed in Switzerland. 


_ General distribution.—Throughout the greater part of Europe. 
Also wanders to North Africa and Western Asia. 
Loxia curvirostra, Linn. Crossbill. — Observed in limited 
numbers in some of the pine forests of Switzerland. In Ireland 
it is rather rare and uncertain as a winter visitor. Locally dis- 


tributed as a resident, breeding, or noticed in the breeding season, 


\ 


in the following counties :—Down, Armagh, Fermanagh, West- 
meath, Meath, Wicklow, Kildare, Queen’s Co., King’s Co., Tip- 
perary, Waterford, Cork, Kerry, Sligo (Ussher).* 

General distribution. — Resident over the pine forests of 
Europe, North Africa, and Siberia. Winters in North China. 
Occurs also in Western Asia and North America, 

Pica rustica, Scop. Magpie. — Common in Switzerland and 
Treland. 

General distribution. — Plentiful in Europe, Western and 
South-western Asia, extending to China and Japan. Found 
also in the northern portions of America and Africa. 

Garrulus glandarius, Linn. Jay.—Abundant in Switzerland. 
Resident and local in Ireland. Breeds in King’s Co., Queen’s 
Co., Carlow, Kilkenny, Wexford, Tipperary, and North Water- 
ford (Ussher). Like the English bird, the alpine Jay is poorer 
in colour than the same species found in Ireland. 

General distribution.—Inhabits the wooded districts of the 
Kuropean continent. The Asiatic and North African forms differ 
from that found in Kurope. 


* For further information concerning this bird, see (a) Ussher on ‘‘ The 
Crossbill,” ‘Irish Nat.’ vol. i. p. 6; also (b) Thompson, ‘ Birds of Ireland’ ; 
(c) ‘ Zoologist,’ 1889, p. 180, 


THE ZOOLOGIST. 


bo 
RG 
Tee 


Hirundo rustica, Linn. Swallow.— Frequently observed in 
Switzerland. Common summer visitor to Ireland. 

General distribution.—Over EKurope,* and the greater part of 
Asia and North Africa in summer, migrating to India as far 
east as Burma, and all over Africa in winter. This bird is 
subject to a variety of foreign representatives, especially those 
connecting the Old with the New World (American) forms (vide 
R. B. Sharpe’s Cat. Birds Brit. Mus. vol. x.). 

Chelidon urbica, Linn. House Martin.—Frequent in Switzer- 
land. Common summer visitor to Ireland. 

General distribution.—Much the same as the last species, 
but, according to Saunders, it seems to winter in Central Africa. 
(In Europe it is rare in the Basque Provinces.) 


Order PIcARIZzZ. 


Cypselus apus, Linn. Swift——Common in Switzerland and in 
Ireland (except the west) in the summer. 

General distribution.—Abundant in Europe in summer. Also 
found in Asia and North Africa at the same time of year. In 
these parts, however, there are racial differences. On the winter 
migration it visits India and South Africa. According to Saunders 
it has occurred at the Andaman Islands. 

C. melba, Linn. Alpine Swift. — Observed in two distinct 
localities in Switzerland: (a) at a high latitude at Grindelwald ; 
(b) in the town and valley of Lucerne. In the latter place many 
Alpine Swifts, in company with the common species, were 
observed flying round an old tower close to the town bridge over 
Lake of Lucerne. These birds often flew under the eaves of the 
building, disappearing for a few minutes, and then flying out 
again. ‘They were evidently nesting there. Extremely rare in 
Ireland. Thompson (‘ Birds of Ireland’) records three speci- 
mens. For occurrences see also ‘List of Irish Birds,’ by the 
late A. G. More, p. 17; and Saunders’s ‘ Manual,’ p. 263. 

General distribution. — Frequents the high mountains of 
Central and Southern Europe in summer; also North Africa, 
West and South-west Asia. In winter it migrates to Central 
India (especially Ceylon), and as far as South Africa. 

N.B.—This Swift can be distinguished from the common 


* Breeds as high north as 70° N. lat. in Scandanavia, 


j 


< 


SOME BIRDS IN IRELAND AND SWITZERLAND. 225 


species by its larger size, browner colour, and white breast and 
abdomen. When the two are not together the best test is the 
voice. In the Alpine Swift the note is a loud double twitter ; in 
the common species it is a single screech. 

Alcedo ispida, Linn. Kingfisher.—Only one was noticed, viz. 
at Lugano; but probably inhabits many other suitable localities 
in Switzerland. Resident and generally distributed in small 
numbers throughout Ireland. 

General distribution. — Resident throughout Central and 
Southern Europe, also North Africa, where it also occurs as a 
winter visitor. The Western and South-western Asiatic types 
vary somewhat from the Kuropean birds. 

Gecinus viridis, Linn. Green Woodpecker.— Rather common 
in different parts of Switzerland. To Ireland it is a very rare 
and accidental visitor. For its occurrences see the following :— 


(a) Thompson, vol. 11. Appendix, p. 441; (b) Watters, p. 97; 


‘ Zoologist,’ 1889, p. 145; (c) ‘ List of Irish Birds,’ by the late 
A. G. More, p. 18; (d) Saunders’s ‘ Manual of British Birds,’ 
1899, p. 273. 

General distribution. — Distributed throughout Central and 
Southern Europe, as well as Western Asia. 

Iiynx torquilla, Linn. Wryneck.—Once observed at Geneva. 
Very rare in Ireland. For occurrences see (a) ‘ List of Irish 


Birds,’ by the late A..G. More, p. 19; (b) ‘ Migration Report for 


1886,’ p. 155; (c) Saunders’s ‘ Manual of British Birds,’ 1899, 
pe esl. 

General distribution.—In summer it is found over the greater 
parts of Europe and Asia, reaching as high as lat. N. 64°. In 
winter it visits Southern Asia and Central Africa. 


Order CoLUMB&. 

Columba palumbus, Linn. Wood-Pigeon; ‘‘ Ring-Dove.”— 
Common in many parts of Switzerland. Resident and common 
in Ireland. 

General distribution.—Over the European continent, North 
Africa, and West Asia, The birds from Northern Europe move 
southwards in winter. | 

Turtur communis, Selby. Turtle-Dove.—A few were seen 
about Central Switzerland (Lucerne and Grindelwald). Rare 


226 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


summer visitor to Ireland, and locally distributed as a breeding 
species. Has probably nested in Down, Kerry, Wicklow, and 
Dublin (Ussher). 


General distribution. — Over Europe, Western ae and — 


North Africa. Most of the Asiatic representatives are distinct. 


Order GaAviIm. 


Larus argentatus, Gmel. Herring-Gull.—A single example 
was observed on Lake Como. Resident and common in Ireland. 

General distribution.— Widely distributed over the coast-land 
and seas of Europe and America. 


Order HERODIONEsS. 


Ciconia alba, Bechst. White Stork.—Five or six examples 
were observed in the open fields in the north-western parts of 
Switzerland during a tour from Basle to Lucerne. Excessively 
rare in Ireland. For its occurrences see (a) Thompson, ‘ Birds 
of Ireland’; (b) ‘List of Irish Birds,’ by the late A. G. More, 
p. 32; (c) ‘ Zoologist,’ 1866, p. 524; (d) Saunders’s ‘ Manual of 
British Birds,’ 1899, p. 388. 

General distribution.—Throughout the greater parts of Europe, 
Central and South-western Asia, and Northern Africa. Passes 
southwards in winter in large numbers through Egypt as far as 


Natal. 


The following species, frequenting both Switzerland and 
Ireland, and widely distributed over the European continent, 
were probably overlooked, and so have not been included in the 
foregoing list :—Peregrine Falcon, Kestrel, Marsh-Harrier, Hen 
Harrier, Long-eared Owl, Barn-Owl, Hedge-Sparrow, Stonechat, 
Wheatear, Sedge-Warbler, Wren, Meadow-Pipit, Reed-Bunting, 
Greenfinch, Linnet, Starling, Chough, Rook, Jackdaw, Sand- 
Martin, Nightjar, Cuckoo, Waterhen, Water- Rail, Land-Rail, 
Coot, Common Heron. 


List of a few birds of doubtful occurrence in Ireland observed 
in Switzerland. 
Nuthatch.—Common in many parts, 


SOME BIRDS IN IRELAND AND SWITZERLAND. 227 


Crested Titmouse.* — Observed in many parts, especially 
Grindelwald and Davos Platz. 
Tree Pipit.—Common in many parts. 


SUMMARY. 


Mention has already been made in the introduction of this 
article on the very brief reference to the general distribution of 
each species. We must regard this theme as being dealt with in 
a mere outlined manner; indeed, the names of the individual 
countries in which the birds have been found have for the most 
part been omitted, and groups of countries taken together form- 
ing part of a continent have been designated as western, south- 
western, northern, &c., so and so. Example: Persia, Arabia, 
Asia Minor, and Palestine are referred to as South-western Asia; 
again, Morocco, Algeria, and Canary Isles as North Africa. This 
has been done for two purposes— firstly, to economise space; and, 
secondly, because much has already been written fully on the 
geographical distribution of birds. Hence standard works as 
Saunders’s ‘ Manual’ (1899), Yarrell’s fourth edition of ‘ British 
Birds, and the late Seebohm’s works have been freely con- 
sulted on this subject, as time and opportunity do not permit 
of personal observations on birds being made in every distant 
land. 

With regard to the personal observations made in Switzer- 
land, it may be added that, although only a limited number of 
places were visited by the authors, nevertheless, as these were 
mostly far apart, some important and definite districts were 
explored. Indeed, a wide area of Switzerland was included in 
the investigation. Thus Davos Platz and many neighbouring 
districts may represent part of Eastern Switzerland; Como and 
Chamonix, Southern Switzerland;.the districts round about 
Geneva as south-western ; Basle, north-western; Schaffhausen. 
northern ; while Lucerne, Berne, and Grindelwald may be con- 
sidered as forming part of Central Switzerland. 

Concerning the observations made in Ireland, it should be 


** Often observed in company with the other common species of Titmice, 
Goldcrests, and Tree Creepers, The same sociable nature of the Titmice 
may be seen in Ireland. | 


228 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


noted that only in the case of birds locally distributed as breeders 
are the counties where they have nested recorded. 

We may conclude by stating that in Southern Switzerland 
and Northern Italy a marked dearth of bird-life prevails. This 
may in part be accounted for. Hundreds of small passerine 
birds are killed off for the markets. In Como and other districts 
Greenfinches, Robins, &c., were seen in the market-places plucked 
and prepared for table use. 


Some References to Birds observed in Switzerland. 


(a) Aplin, O. V.—‘‘ Birds seen in Switzerland’’ (‘ Zoologist,’ 
1892, pp. 3-14). 

(b) Benson, C. W. — “ Ornithological Notes from Lake 
Lucerne” (‘ Zoologist,’ 1893, p. 432); ‘ The Birds of the Riffel- 


alp ” (1898, p. 506). 
(c) Playne, H. C.—‘“‘ Ornithological Notes from the Alps” 
(‘ Zoologist,’ 1893, p. 308). | 
(d) Sclater, P. L.—‘‘ The Birds of the Riffelalp, Canton 
Valais, Switzerland” (‘ Zoologist,’ 1898, pp. 474-76). 


( 229 ) 


NATURAL HISTORY NOTES FROM YORKSHIRE 
FOR 1899. 


By Oxurey Grasuam, M.A., M.B.O.U. 


Tue nesting season of the year 1899 will ever be a red letter 
one in my calendar on account of the excellent series of photo- 
sraphs of nests and eggs, birds on their nests, birds feeding their 
young, &c., many of which are unique, that we—my friends Mr. T. 
A. Metcalfe and Captain H. Moore—were able to obtain. It was 
a bright sunny season, admirable as far as the light was con- 
cerned, and warm enough to be perfectly pleasant when we were 
lying up in water, or hiding for hours in the heather or gorse, for 
a shy bird to come back on to her nest. During the month of 
January many Duck were on inland flood water, but they were 
very bad to approach ina punt. Slavonian Grebes were about 
in some numbers. I had several Pipistrelle Bats and a sandy- 
coloured Mole brought to me. February was fine. Rooks and 
Herons were busy building by the 18th; a piebald Mole was 
caught near Knaresborough, but most unfortunately was thrown 
away before I heard about it. I have been trying to secure a 
piebald and a spotted example for years. Many Little Grebes 
about. The latter end of March was very cold and stormy. The 
pair of Rooks from Mr. Kitching’s rookery at Heworth, that 
have built in a kind of cage just below the weathercock on the 
top of Heworth Church spire, 120 ft. from the ground, every 
year since 1887, have at last completed their nest after many 
failures. I saw a magnificent old male Heron that had unfortu- 
nately been trapped on a well-known Trout stream; he had been 
So often in the traps and escaped that he had not a whole toe 
left. His long crest-plumes measured nine inches. 

' Very early in April Long-eared Owls and Tawny Owls were 
sitting. On the 7th Metcalfe and I tried hard to get a photo- 
graph of the latter as she flew off her four eggs, which were in a 
hollow tree on a “scarr”’ side at the edge of a moor. There 


230 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


were two holes, and she always came out of the left-hand one; 
so we crawled up the hill-side, amidst the mud and stones— 
Metcalfe with the camera, and myself with a long hazel stick to 
tap the tree with—but she must have been on the look-out, for 
just as we got into position, and I was about to tap the tree, out — | 
she came from the right-hand hole, and so disappointed us. I | 
found a Wild Duck’s nest (Mallard) containing nineteen eggs. 
On the 25th of the month I saw the first Swallow, and heard the 
first Corncrake. The Cuckoo I did not hear till the 28th, on — 
which date I found a Sky-Lark’s nest with three eggs. Metcalfe 
got a lovely photo of a cock Lapwing, with crest erected, walking — 
up to the nest. 

On April 2nd, at 10.30 (Kaster Sunday), a Noctule, or Great 
Bat, was hawking about in the sunshine over my garden. 


May. 


On May Ist a fine male Dotterel flew against the telegraph- 
wires at Kilnsea. 

3rd.—Found two Woodcocks’ nests, four eggs in each just 
hatching. Several pairs breed in this wood, and sit so close that 
if one wants to move them they have to be poked off the nest 
with astick. They harmonize so beautifully with the surrounding 
dead leaves and grass that they are most difficult to detect. One 
was a much more golden-coloured bird than the other. 

6th.—Moore and I found several Redshanks’ nests, and eight 


Snipes’. Working with sixty feet of pneumatic tubing, Moore | 


got a beautiful photograph of a Snipe on her nest. We found 
several Wild Ducks’ nests, a Teal’s, and a Shoveler’s; there were 
four pairs of the latter birds in this locality, thanks to the pro- 
tection now afforded them. The nests are most carefully con- 
cealed in thick tussocks, and have a regular run in, a foot or 
more in length, under the grass, from the place where the birds 
alight. When lying down in cover we had two drakes, looking 
lovely in the sunshine, fly within twenty yards of us. Several of 
the Redshank’s eggs had been destroyed by Carrion Crows. 
Heard the Grasshopper Warbler, and saw several Adders. 

9th.— Dug out a nest of four young Moles, about half-grown. 

16th.—Green Woodpecker’s nest containing two eggs; Coal 
Tit’s, containing twelve eggs, well covered up; all the Tits 


. 


- 


NATURAL HISTORY NOTES FROM YORKSHIRE. 231 


cover their eggs. Put up a Nightjar, which flew into a Scotch 
fir, and squatted, as they always do, lengthwise along a bough. 

17th.—Found a Hawfinch’s nest with eggs. Waterhen’s with 
young on the top of a reed-fence five feet from the ground. 

22nd.—Several Tree-Sparrows’ nests in an old orchard. Long- 
eared Owl’s with young in an old Magpie’s nest. 

27th.—A fine Allis Shad, weighing 6 lb. 2 0z., was brought to 
me. It had been caught in a Salmon-net not far from York. 
These fish rarely come up the Derwent so far nowadays. 

28th.—Young Magpies out of the nest. In some of the 
market-gardens about here they do damage to the strawberry- 
beds, eating the fruit just before it gets ripe. 

29th.—Metcalfe and I found several Reed Bunting’s, Lark’s, 
Meadow Pipit’s, and Whinchat’s nests. It has been asserted in 
the pages of ‘ The Zoologist’ that the latter bird is not double- 
brooded, but it is undoubtedly so here. The customs and habits 
of birds differ in different localities. Nearly all the Sky-Larks’ 


nests contained three eggs. I look upon this as the usual clutch 


in Yorkshire ; often there are four, but very rarely indeed five. 
31st.—Found eggs of the Black-headed Gull. This colony, 


almost our last in the county, is, I am glad to say, holding its 


own, thanks to the protection afforded by the owner of the estate. 
It used to be ruthlessly harried, the eggs taken regularly, and it 
is a wonder that it has survived. The Wild Birds Protection Act 
is very often a mere farce, and were it not that private enterprise 
frequently steps in, it would be a complete failure. Moore gota 
photo of a Redshank on her nest. ‘The camera was most care- 


fully covered up, and he was working with a hundred yards of 


fishing-line tied to the trigger, and hiding behind a clump of 
gorse; but he had to wait five hours before she came back, and 
then he got a shot at her. A Cuckoo’s egg, ordinary type, much 
incubated, in a Hedge-Sparrow’s nest. 


JUNE. 
Ist.—An old Rook, well powdered with white on the breast 
and back, got at Cottingwith. 
3rd.—A fine old cock Crossbill, caught in a Magpie-trap at 
Thornton-dale, was brought to me by Mr. R. Hill, which I 
stuffed. 


232 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


6th.—Moore and I went to photograph the Black-headed 


Gulls on their nests, and were most successful. I never thought | 


they would face the camera; as the marsh took us up nearly to 
our middles, and we had to lash sticks on to the tripod, leaving 
the camera several feet above the water; then we screened it 


with green boughs of birch, and worked with one hundred yards | 


of fine Trout-line. We got some beauties. 

8th.—Moore tried to photograph a Turtle-Dove on her nest, 
but, though he waited five hours for the bird to come back, and 
the camera was so well concealed that three boys going to bathe 
passed within a couple of yards of it, and never noticed it, yet 
the bird would not return. They are most difficult birds to 
photograph on the nest. 

10th.—Metealfe got three lovely photographs of a Common 
Sandpiper on her nest, in three different positions. 

12th.—Went with Moore to photograph the nest and eggs of 
the Great Crested Grebe. I am glad to say these birds have 
increased considerably. If only we had had another ten feet of 
pneumatic tubing we should have got the old bird on the nest. 
We had the keeper up a tree ready to whistle to us when she 
settled, and she came close up several times; but most unfortu- 
nately she could just see our heads above a bank, where we were 
lying with our legs in the water. We were miles from home, and 
had to get back that night; and so we failed through want of 4 
few feet of tubing. Found a Grasshopper-Warbler’s nest with 
young. 

19th.— Moore and I made a day’s journey to get a Reed 
Warbler on her nest. Were most successful. Got her in four 
different positions coming on to the nest. I believe these, like 
the Redshank and Lapwing, are unique. Found several nests ; 
some just finished, some with four fresh eggs, some with hard-set 
eggs. Also Moore got a very pretty photo of a Pheasant on her 
nest, using a long-focus lens. Sawa pair of Tufted Ducks, but 
had no time to look for the nest. 

23rd.—Went down into Holderness for a night to enquire 
into the ruthless destruction that has been going on amongst our 
last remaining colony of Lesser Terns. While the watcher was 
on, appointed by the County Council, the birds increased in 
number; but now the trippers, who come over by steamer from 


.. 


NATURAL HISTORY NOTES FROM YORKSHIRE. 2338 


Grimsby, work sad havoc amongst them. One man alone took 
thirty-eight eggs back with him. ‘The lighthousemen and the 
local policeman do what they can, but unless a proper watcher is 
again put on, as he most certainly ought to be, the birds are 
doomed. I found them so shy that they keep high up in the air, 
leaving their eggs to the heat of the sun and sand during the day- 
time, and only returning to them at dusk, when their enemies 
have departed. It is really iniquitous that our last remaining 
colony in the county of these pretty little birds should be so 
harried, and strong measures ought to be taken at once to ensure 
‘their breeding in peace. Was very glad to find a Sielduck sit- 
ting hard in a Rabbit-burrow on the sand-hills. Great numbers 
of Corn-Buntings about. __ 
30th.—Metcalfe got a splendid photograph of a Golden Plover 
on her nest. 
JULY. 
ist.—A fine Trout caught at Thorntondale, weighing 24 lb. 
10th.—Moore and I went to take a Nightjar on her eggs, 
which were just upon hatching. Working with sixty feet of 
pneumatic tubing, we got six good shots at her in various posi- 
tions in a little over an hour; then we left her in peace. . The 
difficulty was to keep her off the eggs. She was back again after 
each changing of the plates in a very short time. I wish some- 
one would invent a method of changing plates without the 
operator having to leave cover—as, for instance, on pulling a 
string, the exposed plate to slip down into a compartment, and 
a new one pushed forward into position by a spring, or some- 
thing of that sort. 
11th.—Saw a curiously marked F'ox-cub, having three large 
white stockings (one hind leg and both fore legs), and a large 
white patch on the back of the head, the size of the palm of a 
‘man’s hand. Had a live Hawfinch brought to me that had been 
caught eating peas. I am sorry to say that many get shot in 
gardens owing to this habit. 
13th.—Heavy storm; some lumps of ice fell as big as Black- 
bird’s eggs, doing a great amount of damage. 
15th.—Saw a curious Jackdaw with cinnamon-coloured wings. 
19th.—Found a Little Grebe’s nest containing three eggs. 
The nest was made of the following plants:—(1) Sparganium 
4oot. 4th ser. vol. IV., May, 1900. R 


234 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


ramosum, branched bur-reed; (2) Potamogeton rufescens, red 
pondweed ; (3) P. densus, close-leaved pondweed ; (4) Anacharis 
alsinastrum, water-tnyme ; (5) Sium angustifolium, water-parsnip ; 
(6) Hippuris vulgaris, marestail; (7) Equisetum arvense, barren 
stem of common horsetail; (8) Fontinalis antipyretica, great 
water-moss. These were most kindly identified for me by Mr. M. 
B. Slater, F.L.S., of Malton. 

21st.—Stuffed a Whiskered Bat. 

24th.—Lying up in cover at dusk with a friend, we had seven 
Badgers, four old and three young, playing about within forty 
yards of us. (See the ‘ Field,’ Feb. 3rd, 1900, for full account 
of the Badger in Yorkshire.) Would have given much to have 
been able to photograph them, but the light was gone for this 


purpose. 
AUGUST. 


August was a very hot month. Grouse have done well on 
nearly all the Yorkshire moors, and the young birds are fine and 
strong on the wing. An Osprey was shot on the 29th near Filey. 
Two young Dotterels at Hasington, Holderness, on the 22nd. 


SEPTEMBER. 


September was also very hot. Partridges are plentiful. Over 
a small farm I and a friend shot eighteen brace; but here where 
we used to get fifteen or twenty Hares in a day fifteen years ago, 
now we never see one. I was over at Flamborough for a few 
days, and far out at sea saw many Skuas, mostly Arctic Skuas. 
An immature Sabine’s Gull was shot here at the end of the 
month. A Great Snipe was obtained at Thorntondale, and 
another at Beverley, and near the latter place also a fine young 
Black-tailed Godwit, and a Greenshank. Mr. Stuart, the well- 
known birdstuffer of that town, tells me that a Wood Sandpiper 
was shot at Aike Beck End, on the river Hull, at the beginning 
of the month. Several Black Terns were observed off Bridling- 
ton, and some were shot. The large spring migration of these 
birds that has been noticed near Hemsworth for the last few 
years was not observed this year. 


OcTOBER. 
When Pheasant-shooting on the 2nd put up a Landrail. A fine 
Honey Buzzard was obtained near Beverley. I regret deeply 


LAM ‘ 
- ‘ > 
7 ae { 
MR 
4 


- 


NATURAL HISTORY NOTES FROM YORKSHIRE. — 235 


that another fine Osprey was shot near Scarborough. An arch- 


angel would have no chance in these days. Common Buzzard, 
Little Gull, Sandwich Tern, and Pomatorhine Skua were 
obtained at Bridlington. On the 14th a beautiful white Weasel 


"was shot at Whixley by Mr. H. Pexton; it had normal coloured 
eyes, and was of a very pure white. These varieties of the 


Weasel are very scarce; this is only the second that I have seen. 
Mr. Allen, the well-known York taxidermist, showed me a young 
Rat, which cannot have been more than six weeks old, in which 
the upper incisors had either been broken completely away, or 
had never been; but the lower ones had grown and curled to the 


length of nearly two inches—a remarkably rapid growth. Hada 


white Mole sent to me, which I stuffed. Was away at the Lin- 
colnshire flight-nets at the end of the month. 


NOVEMBER. 
A Gray Phalarope got at the Teesmouth, Nov. 19th, shot with 
a pistol. A Red-necked Phalarope obtained at Easington, Holder- 
ness, on the 8th. Several Whooper Swans in Bridlington Bay. - 


Green Sandpipers about. In the middle of the month I was 


down on the Humber. Ata certain spot there were great num- 
bers of our commonest Wild Goose—the Pink-footed. I saw one 
huge mass of them, in which there cannot have been much fewer 
than a thousand birds; they arrive early in September, and 
remain throughout the winter. About 8 o’clock every morning, 
making a great noise, long skeins of them fly over North Cave 
Vicarage, where my friend the Rev. W. M. Tomlinson lives, on 
their way to feed on the stubbles, &c., on the wolds. One morn- 
ing, with his Rook-rifle, Tomlinson fired at the leading bird, 
which was a great height up, and a big field’s distance from the 
garden. He hit the third bird, and down it came. We had it 


in a pie, and excellent it was. I preserved the skin for him, as a 
memento of a wonderful shot. In such mild open weather we 


were quite unable to get near the birds on the Humber with a 
punt and big gun. On the 25th, when Pheasant shooting, I was 
surprised to see a large Frog hopping about in the middle of a 
wood as merrily as if it were June. Saw two Woodcock. 


DECEMBER. 


During December we had some very severe weather. Mr. 
R 2 


236 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Moody, falconer to Mr. W. H: St. Quintin, of Scampston, saw 
several Bean Geese at Lowthorpe, and about fifty Whooper Swans © 
at Scampston. Two Bewick’s Swans were obtained at Leyburn, 
and a Brent Goose on the Swale, near Thirsk. A wild Gadwall, 
a very scarce Duck in the county, was obtained near Scampston. 
I am very sorry to have to record the slaughter of five Bitterns— 
two near Scarborough, one near Beverley, one at Easington, 
Holderness, and one at Lowthorpe. Several Little Auks were 
got on the coast, and one was put out of a hedge-bottom and 
caught by a Dog about three miles from York. ‘Towards the end 
of the month vast numbers of Duck were on the Humber, many 
flying actually into the village of Kasington, in which district one 
man alone shot thirty to his own gun in a single day. Many 
Duck also came inland, and great quantities of Dunlin within ten 
miles of York. A wild Peregrine Falcon was observed near 
Scampston feeding on a Mistle-Thrush. 


I cannot close these notes without referring to the very great 
loss all ornithologists have sustained, and especially we in York- 
shire, by the all too early deaths of Mr. John Cordeaux and Mr. 
H. Bendelack Hewetson during this year. They were both per- 
sonal friends of mine, and both took the greatest interest in all 
that pertained to the bird-life of the county. Many a ramble 
have | had with them both with gun and field-glass in the most 
favoured bird resorts of the county which they both loved so well; 
and it seems strange now, when I visit these places, not to hear 
their cheery voices, and to be told by them all the latest bird 
news. Well, we must all come to it sooner or later, and we shall 
do well if, like them, we leave a few footprints behind us, how- 
ever small, before we ourselves are summoned to join them in 
the Happy Hunting Grounds. 


( 2387 ) 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


AVES. 


Curious Partnership of Hedge-Sparrow and Blackbird in a Nest.— 
On April 13th this year a half-finished nest was found in a rhododendron 
in my grounds, the character and materials of which gave one the idea of it 
being a Hedge-Sparrow’s (Accentor modularis), though from its size, and 
from the presence of large twigs and grasses, it seemed very doubtful that 
it could be the work of one. The nest steadily grew in size, and partook 
more and more of the character of a Blackbird’s (Turdus merula), until in 
due course it was finished, and on April 19th it was found to possess its 
first egg—a Hedge-Sparrow’s. On the 20th, when looked at next, the nest 
contained two Hedge-Sparrow’s eggs and one Blackbird’s. On the 21st 
the numbers had increased by one more egg of each kind, and on the 22nd 
the score stood at four Hedge-Sparrow’s and three Blackbird’s. The 
following day the Blackbird had brought the score up level, and begun to 
sit, but the weight of the hen Blackbird proved too much for the Hedge- 
Sparrow’s eggs, and when the nest was looked at again on the 24th one of 
the four Hedge-Sparrow’s eggs was crushed to pieces, and another badly 
cracked. The nest was then taken so as to preserve the production of such 
an ill-assorted couple of nest-builders. — W. Firzaerpert-BRocKHOLES 
(Claughton-on-Brock, Garstang, Lancashire). 


Pied Flycatcher in Somersetshire.—On the morning of April 27th 
I saw a male Pied Flycatcher (Muscicapa atricapilla) in my father’s garden, 
Weston-super-Mare. ‘The bird was very tame, and was probably resting on 
its way to its breeding haunts in Wales. This species appears to be rare 
in Somerset, and I only know of two records of its former occurrence in the 
county, namely, one killed near Taunton some years prior to 1869, as 
recorded in Mr. Cecil Smith’s ‘ The Birds of Somerstshire’; and a record, 
noticed near Wells in the spring of 1870 (vide ‘ The Birds of Devon,’ by 
D’'Urban and Matthew, p. 53).' It has doubtless been noticed more than 
once since 1870, but its visits to the county are evidently irregular, and 
probably accidental. On April 25th, 1897, I saw a male bird of this 
species near Gidleigh, North Devon, in which county the bird appears to 
be nearly as rare as it is in Somersetshire. Last summer I came across 
several pairs of Pied Flycatchers in a certain locality in Herefordshire, 


ive 


238 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


where I found one nest on May 31st containing seven eggs. As far as I 
know, there are not many instances on record of its breeding in this county. 
—F. L. Buatuwayrt (Saltaire, Weston-super-Mare). 


Lateness in Appearance of the Summer Migrants.—The following 


experience is unique in my recollection, and may be worth recording. 
Having failed up to April 4th to discover a single summer migrant of any 
species, I determined to spend the morning of the 10th in an elaborate 
search. It was fine and, on the whole, warm, and the country was 
extremely beautiful. I rambled about for three hours among woods and 
meadows, and along the banks of our stream, searching every spot which I 
have ever known to be frequented by Chiffchaffs on their first arrival, but 
without success. By this time we may usually expect to see three or four 
other species, though the dates of arrival in this upland district are seldom 
very early ; but neither Blackcap, Redstart, or Tree Pipit were to be seen. 
I saw a small flock of Meadow Pipits, a species which leaves us for the 
summer. Starlings are still in large packs, though many, of course, are 
breeding ; Lapwings are only just beginning their nests. The hedges are 
as black as in the winter, and I do not see the flies about them which 
accompany the opening of the leaf. Under such circumstances one can 
hardly expect the summer birds; but it would be interesting to know 
where they are, and what doing—W. Warpge Fow.ier (Kingham, Chip- 
ping Norton). 


Observations on Birds during the exceptional severe Spring in 
Aberdeen.—Towards the end of March there was an unusual tameness of 
those birds frequenting the neighbourhood of farm-buildings, which in- 
dicated a continuance of severe weather at a later date of the year than is 
usual. While the general variety made their appearance at the late date, 
and were very tame, one bird which appears during snowstorms earlier in 
the year, the Snow Bunting (Plectrophenaax nivalis), was not observed, 
except by a few stragglers. While the weather has been severe and the 
snow prolonged, there have not been many birds destroyed wy starvation. 
Lapwings have evidently not been much disturbed, although there has 
been repetitions of severe frosts since they arrived. Partridges have been 
put to considerable straits, if we may judge by their tameness. ‘Their 
haunts have been more closely covered with snow than is at all usual, and 
we find a wintery stillness following bird-life well into the spring of the 
year, when we are accustomed to hear melodies from many throats. Is 
this a sequel to the singing of the Sky-Lark in October of 1899, and does 
the cold snow-clad ground delay the melodies of this great songster ? 
Pairing, which always accompanies an early spring, has also been retarded 
by the struggle for existence, packing having replaced the usual pairing 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 239 . 


season of this year ; so that there will be no danger to reproduction through 
too early nesting, which sometimes is a risk when cold weather sets in later 
in the year. A Robin, which may be reasonably supposed to have made my 
stable its shelter up to this its tenth winter, was crushed by a horse a week 
or two ago; it was acquainted with all the customs of the place. One at 
least appeared in the autumn that the stable was first in use, returning 
every following year, until its peculiar habits drew attention to it.— W. 
Witson (Alford, N.B.). 


Notes from Norfolk.—fritton Decoy. Mr. Patterson (ante, p. 160) 
gives the catch of fowl in Sir Savile Crossley’s decoy at Fritton for the 
season 1887-8. As that season was described by the decoyman as a bad 
one, “not many fowl on the decoy, plenty of Wigeon after the 1st March,” 
which, as usual, were too late to add to the return, perhaps readers may 
like to know what was done in the past season, which in the months of 
December, January, and part of February was a very favourable one. I 
therefore send the following return :— 


Duck. Teal. | Wigeon. | Pintail. 


1899. 
GI GEE oasis ccc veccs Tess 67 — — oa 
INNMIGEUD OY veecsccccecessss 56 4 1 — 
MOGCETIDEL” c.ciccccccveces 1529 13 a, — 
1900. 
AO incest neces des 561 — — — 
oS Se a 472, 4 10 2 
OUR ee. os ces cseeeessdoss — — — — 
Total, 2721 2685 4 | tS" 2 


The average take for the past thirty-eight seasons has been 989. It has 
often been said that perfect seclusion is an absolute requisite for the 
successful working of a decoy. In this instance, although the pipes and 
the adjacent water are kept perfectly quiet, a high road runs at a very 
short distance from the decoy, and the Ducks may be seen on the water 
from passing vehicles. Little inconvenience is experienced from this, as 
the fowl soon become accustomed to such sights, and it is only sudden or 
strange sights or sounds which cause alarm. Very few Teal are taken 
here now, and only an occasional Wigeon, as the decoy is not worked after 
_ the end of February, which is too early for the spring migration of these 
birds. The only other fowl are a few Pintails, and now and then a 
Shoveler, Goosander, or Coot.—THomas SouTHWELL (Norwich). 


Nesting Notes.—Mr. Aplin is quite correct in noting (ante, p. 143) my 
omission of the Robin from the list of birds which haye used nesting-boxes 


240 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


here, but we find old kettles, water-cans, &c., possess the same attractions — 
for this species that boxes have for the Tits ard Nuthatches. Several of - 
our nesting-boxes have had the entrance-holes enlarged by Starlings, which — 


seem to be able to peck away the wood from an old weather-beaten box 


without difficulty. This year, for the first time, we have had an old cask — 


occupied by a pair of Tawny Owls, which had on March 27th four eggs laid 
on the remains of a Starling’s nest.—JuLian G. Tuck (Tostock Rectory, 
Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk). 


AVICULTURAL NOTES. 


Cormorant in Captivity.—The historic Cormorant of Montagu has 
made interesting reading for generations. The following notes on one, 
« Joey,” now in my possession, may not record anything so striking as the 
tameness and intelligence displayed by that naturalist’s bird, but my example 
has been nevertheless interesting. He was brought to me from sea by a 
smacksman on March 22nd. After incarceration in an old hamper for some 
days, the bird exhibited his delight on being turned into a netted enclosure 
by mounting the rockwork, and immediately putting his plumage into shape 
by shaking his wings, and by the use of his mandibles. In two days he 
learnt to recognize his fish-basket, and had already, after a day’s fasting, 
become adroit at catching the fish and fish-heads thrown to him. On 
March 28th, after receiving five Whitings, the last leaving its tail out of the 
corner of his mouth, he in a hour’s time made room for two more. On April 
18th, for his breakfast, he devoured three good-sized Whitings, one Vivi- 
parous Blenny, one Herring, one Flounder. Not yet satisfied, he accepted 
an 18 in. Conger-Hel. This vanished, save for three or four inches of the 
tail-end, which greatly annoved him by refusing to be drawn or shaken 
down; at length, by flapping his wings and stretching his bedy to the 
utmost, it was lost sight of. Five minutes afterwards he seized a Flounder, 
and made room for it. The bird has not attempted to drink or even look 
at water, although, after feeding and a short nap, he anoints his plumage 
by a free manipulation of the oil-glands. After swallowing fish, drops of 
water drip from his mandibles. It is seldom that undigested bones are cast 
up, these few being usually those of large Plaice-heads that have been 
chopped in order to reduce them to a convenient size for swallowing. The 
bird has become tame, and salutes me with curious trumpeting notes, 
accompanying them with a profound salaam ; and, although he allows me 
to stroke his back with a stick or brush, is ever ou the alert to seize a finger 
if possible.—A. PatrErson (Ibis House, Great Yarmouth). 


NOTES AND QUERIES 241 


Pips: E's. 

Notes from Great Yarmouth. — Fishes rare or curious have been 
sparsely met with in local waters during the past six months. The only 
records of exceptional interest, beyond the great takes of Herrings of last 
fishing season, were a white Sole (Solea vulgaris), on Sept. 19th, 1899; 
one or two Anchovies (Hngraulis encrasicholus) in October, from the drift- 
nets ; a Porbeagle (Lamna cornubica), our locally commonest Shark ; and 
a Sturgeon of the variety Accipenser latirostris, which measured 4 ft., on or 
about Nov. 23rd. A 10 in. Lemon Sole (Solea lascaris) was brought me on 
Jan. 13th of the present year, and on the 16th an albino Sole, measuring 
114 in. Only a very narrow ring of the normal colouring encircled the 
eyes, and the slightest tinge of pink was observable on the fins. It was 
forwarded to the Cambridge Zoological Museum. A Plaice (Pleuronectes 


platessa), which was all white with the exception of the head and ventral 


fins, came to hand early in March. The first example of the Planer’s 
Lamprey (Petromyzon branchialis) that I have been fortunate in identifying 
as locally occurring, I discovered ou a heap of seaweed washed up at the 


harbour’s mouth on April 10th. It measured 44 in. in length, and was big 


in spawn ; the ova, iudeed, oozed from it. In the Norfolk and Norwich 
Naturalists’ ‘ Transactions,’ it is recorded as occurring at Keswick, where it 
is described as being ‘‘ numerous in ditches containing small springs, to 
which this species appears to be attracted.” The colour was dull green, 
relieved underneath by yellowish tints. On April 20th a faded example, 
long kept in ice, of the Ballan Wrasse (Labrus maculatus) was brought me 
from a trawler; it had undoubtedly been taken in a trawl-net ‘‘ nor’ard of 
the Dogger,” and is scarcely entitled to a place in the local list ; the species 
has, however, been identified already at Yarmouth. — A. Parrerson (Ibis 
House, Great Yarmouth). 


( 242 ) 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


A Treatise on Zoology. Edited by E. Ray Lanxester, M.A., 
LL.D., F.R.S., &c. Part III. The Echinoderma by 
F. A. Batuer, M.A., assisted by J. W. Grecory, D.Sc., 
and E. S. Goopricu, M.A. Adam and Charles Black. 


We have during the last few years drawn the attention of 
our readers to several volumes of the ‘Cambridge Natural 
History.” We now invite their perusal of the first volume 
issued by the sister University. For this is really an Oxford 
publication; and, as the editor states in his preface, ‘‘the 
authors are, for the most part, graduates of the University of 
Oxford, though it may not be possible to maintain this limita- 
tion in future sections of the work.” ‘‘ The work is addressed 
to the serious student of zoology,” and as such must be taken 
and appreciated. We seem to be approaching once more the 
high water-mark of technical zoology. These pages have dis- 
tinctly the imprimatur of the editor, and may be accepted as 
conveying information that is full, recent, and reliable. Prof. 
Ray Lankester has very thoroughly identified himself with the 
volumes, and seems to have accepted a complete responsibility 
as editor. Mr. Bather has undertaken the greater part of the 
work; Dr. Gregory has contributed the chapter on the Stelleroidea 
and Hechinoidea; that on the Holothurioidea is from the pen of 
Mr. Goodrich. 

It is to be hoped that this volume will circulate beyond the 
arena of even the serious student, if that term is to bear a 
restricted significance. The purely British zoologist is a recruit 
from many non-academical centres: he is often a good observer, 
with little technical knowledge; his tastes are frequently biono- 
mical rather than widely biological; his knowledge of the living 
habits of an animal are generally in an inverse ratio to that of its - 
phylogeny and ontogeny; he is practically a field naturalist, and 
knows the haunts of his creatures rather than the facts of their 


» 
* 
‘ 
a ‘ 
es) 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 243 


evolution; he is more concerned with the appearance of the 
living form than with its structure ; but he is, nevertheless, not 


seldom, a master of his craft. The value of his observations was 


e 


appraised and canonized by Darwin; but that it should be less 


‘superficial, that it should be more introspective, have a wider 


meaning, and a more philosophical clue, is unquestionable, and 
a book like this supplies the one thing needful. Zoology can 
neither be divorced from the fields nor from the laboratory—it is 


- part and parcel of our own history; in an evolutionary sense 


“ our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting’’; and even the Kchi- 
noderma, when thus described, and the inseparable technicalities 
absorbed by the ready mother wit of both student and peasant, 
will increase our knowledge of what they are, and our perception 
of what we are. 

There is a most excellent bibliography attached to each 
branch of the subject; and the book is far more than a 
zoological ledger posted up to date. 


Sexual Dimorphism in the Animal Kingdom: a Theory of the 
Evolution of Secondary Sexual Characters. By J. T. 
CunnincHam, M.A. Adam and Charles Black. 


‘Most naturalists are familiar with Darwin's theory of “Sexual 
Selection,” a theory which perhaps met with less general accept- 
ance than any other put forward by our great biological philo- 
sopher, being even vigorously opposed by Mr. Wallace, his 
fellow-enunciator of the doctrine of “ Natural Selection.” Mr. 
Cunningham not only offers another hypothesis, but altogether 
starts from a Lamarckian standpoint, and is quite outside the 
views of either Darwin or Wallace on the subject, frankly stating 
that his object is to point out ‘‘how remarkably the multitudinous 
facts all agree with the hypothesis that secondary sexual characters 
are due to the inheritance of acquired characters.” This course 
leads the author to some most startling speculations. His con- 
clusion being “that the direct effects of regularly recurrent 
stimulations are sooner or later developed by heredity, but only 
in association with the physiological conditions under which they 
were originally produced,’ we meet with the following suggestions 
as to the origin of the beard in males, which “it is probable 


244 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


enough was derived by ourselves from an Ape-like ancestor.” 
The keepers of the Zoological Gardens having informed Darwin 
that Monkeys attack each other by the throat, Mr. Cunningham 
thinks it “‘not impossible that the growth of the beard was 
originally excited by the stimulus caused by such attacks, the 
hair of the throat and around the mouth being regularly moved 
and pulled by the adversary’s jaws and teeth, or perhaps by the 
hands.” That the true cause of the loss of hair on the evolved 
human body ‘was the wearing of clothes,’ will perhaps require 
more support from anthropological facts than is certainly at 
present obtainable. Starting from the fact that irritation of a 
bone by blows will cause exostosis, the assumption is considered 
*‘ probable that the growth of the antlers was caused originally 
by the ancestral stags butting their heads together, and so 
irritating the frontal bone.” The comb and wattle of the Cock, 
Gallus bankiva, may owe its original stimulation to the ** pecking 
by the beaks of other birds”; while the fleshy caruncle of the 
Turkey Cock is ascribed to a similar origin. 

These extracts will suffice to show the line of argument used 
to support this theory; and our object being rather to “notice” 
new books than to criticise new views, we think we have fairly 
focussed attention to this return from Darwin to Lamarck. The 
central idea or argument is carried through the principal zoolo- 
gical phyla, and to support it many interesting and little-known 
facts are adduced, which will interest and instruct, though per- 
haps not always convert the reader. 

If a second edition should appear, it will be well to revise 
some personal names. On one page we read—Mr. Roland 
Trimen, on the next he is Sir Roland Trimen; Mr. Cronwright 
Schreiner has certainly changed his name, but has not yet called 
himself “Conrad”; and the late Alfred Tylor did not spell his 
name “Tyler.” These are small matters, but Mr. Cunningham 
will doubtless be glad to rectify them. | 


Evolution. By Frank B. Jevons, M.A., D. Litt. 
Methuen & Co. | 
Zootoey has long been recognized as a progressive science— 
and it ise In 1859 Darwin did not introduce the doctrine of 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 245 


evolution, as is so generally supposed by the “ outlanders” of 
science, but by his own memorable enunciation of the theory of 
‘natural selection” he cleared the speculative air which was full 
of fads and chimeras, and enabled the giant shadow of ‘ organic 
evolution” to dominate all biological problems. But other 
studies besides biological ones were soon controlled by this line of 
thought; the argument applied to the physical development of the 
Ape was found to belong to the questions of the non-zoological 
philosopher ; it guided the anthropologist, and absolutely cap- 
tured the philologist. Theology at first was aghast, but by the 
year 1883 the late Sir William Flower was found reading a paper 
on evolution before a ‘‘ Church Congress”; and now we have this 
very fair estimation of the theory in a volume which forms part 
of a series entitled ‘‘ The Churchman’s Library.” 

The position of the author of this book—which all who 
take an interest in the application of biological thought to 
general philosophy should read—is to be gathered by several 
candid statements scattered through its pages. Thus we read 
there are certain broad facts beyond dispute. “It is in- 
disputable that there was a period in the history of the earth 
when there was no life upon it; that the elements which con- 
stitute living matter are themselves lifeless; that consciousness 
is correlated somehow with those organic compounds, the 
elements of which are inorganic. These facts constitute an 
irresistible presumption that ultimately mind and matter must 
obey the same laws.” Again, we are told of those “‘who with 
us accept the continuity and uniformity between nature and 
man.” 

Here we welcome a real sympathy between science and 
theology, for, as Dr. Jevons clearly states, ‘religion is not 
science.” He follows an argument that “faith” largely enters 
into both; but here we enter a dialectical arena, the tourneys 
in which these pages are not intended to record. The volume, 
however, is not outside zoology; if there is an evolution in 
animal life, it applies to man, and must affect all conduct and 
speculation. ‘hat it does so is generally recognized; how it 
does so is the thesis of this publication. 


246 THE “ZO0OLO0GIST. 


The Game Birds and Wild Fowl of the British Islands. By 
CHaruEs Dixon.’ Second Edition, enlarged, improved, 
and thoroughly revised by the Author. Sheffield: Pawson 
& Brailsford. 


In perusing this very handsome volume, including Doves and 
Pigeons, it seems almost as difficult to define the limits of Game 
Birds as to give a correct description of what is meant by the 
term “ Sportsman.”’ 

This is the second edition of a good and useful book, in which 
the subject is brought up to date. It possesses a very readable 
introduction, in which, as Mr. Dixon has his own views on migra- 
tion, he propounds his own conclusions as to ‘“‘ the geographical 
history of avine life.’”? He zoologically divides the world into 
three realms: first, an Intertropical or Primogzean realm, with 
northern and southern limits marked tentatively by the tropics ; 
second, an Arctogeean or Northern realm, which embraces the 
entire world north of the Tropic of Cancer ; third, a Notogean 
or Southern realm, which in like manner includes the entire 
world south of the Tropic of Capricorn; and he looks forward 
to substantiate these propositions when the exploration of the 
Antarctic and high Southern regions shall have taken place. 

Hach bird is amply treated, its nomenclature being followed 
by its ‘“ Geographical Distribution,” “ Allied Forms,” ‘“ Habits,” 
‘* Nidification,” and “‘ Diagnostic Characters.” Many species are 
figured, there being forty-one coloured plates, representing fifty - 
six coloured illustrations ; while the number of species and races 
of Game Birds and Wild Fowl which Mr. Dixon includes in the 
British avifauna is 127. The literature already existing in 
reference to these birds seems to have been amply consulted, 
and little more of importance concerning the distribution and 
habits can probably be gleaned. This is a good book to possess, 
especially for those who seek to know the life-histories of these 
British Birds, as there has been no reason for unnecessary con- 
densation, and ample space has resulted in liberal treatment. 
The plates have been drawn by Charles Whymper, and their 
reproduction reflects the greatest credit on the publishers. 


<a 


pee aaa 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 


Most of our readers will have been made cognizant of the recent great 
**boom ” of the last edition of the ‘ Encyclopedia Britannica,’ and doubt- 
less those who could spare the cash, and, what was far more necessary, 
room, have acquired those excellent volumes. We are glad to notice a very 
useful and novel publication on the same lines in the ‘ Temple Encyclopedic 
Primers,’ published by J. M. Dent & Co., in which each subject occupies a 
small and very inexpensive volume, handy in size, nicely printed, and well 
illustrated. This method allows selection by those who limit their subjects, 
and who have already congested shelves. ‘Two only of those yet published 
have appertained to our domain. One—“ An Introduction to Science,” by ° 
Dr. Alexander Hill, Master of Downing, Cambridge—cannot be considered 
foreign to our studies, for it admirably conveys what should philosophically 
qualify many of our conceptions and conclusions on what, are often, but 
materialistic appearances, while pointing to a moderate and healthy idealism. 
The second primer is on “ Ethnology,” by Dr. Michael Haberlandt, of the 
Ethnological Museum, Vienna, which will hold its place among other much 
larger and more pretentious publications on the subject. 


WE have received the ‘ Illustrated Annual of Microscopy ’ for this year, 
published by Percy Lund, Humphries & Co. Ltd. Besides very much 
useful information regarding method of work and appliances, for those who 
study the small things of life, and, as says a motto on the publications of the 
French Entomological Society, ‘‘ Natura mawime miranda in minimis,” 
there are also some strictly biological articles. Mr. D. J. Scourfield has 
given a beautifully illustrated article on “ A Hyaline Daphnia”; Mr. W. M. 
Webb has written on “‘ Some Mollusca and the Microscope”; and ‘ British 
Fresh-water Mites—Arrenurus ” is the subject of Mr.C. D. Soar. As this 
last author well remarks, ‘‘ very few workers in Britain have taken up this 
part of pond-life at present.” Mr. Macer describes “‘ A unique method of 
exhibiting microscopically a living fly in the act of feeding.” These are the 
bionomic facts which will revolutionise the zoology of the future. We 
would fain hear more from microscopists in these pages. 


In the last (April) number of the ‘ Auk’ is a most interesting communi- 
cation entitled ‘‘ Care of Nest and Young,” by Francis H. Herrick. We can 
only give the following extracts :—‘‘ It is plainly advantageous for birds 
which breed on or near the ground to remove every particle of litter which 


948 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


would stain or whiten the leaves and surrounding foliage, and thus adver- 
tise the secret of their nest to enemies, even to those who prowl after dusk. 
When a Red-eyed Vireo, whose behavionr I studied at close range, dropped 
any bit of excrement by accident, she darted after it with such speed that it _ 
was snatched up before reaching the ground, or before falling a distance of 
four feet. . Not a trace of defilement is ever seen around the dwellings of 
any of these birds. | 

“‘On the other hand, predaceous species like Hawks pay no attention to 
such matters. ‘The excrement of their young is voided in a semi-fluid state, 
and in a peculiar manner. With tail turned to the edge of the nest the bird 
shoots it off to a distance of two or three feet, and it may strike the ground 
six or seven feet from the nesting-tree. “The only significance which such 
actions have is that of keeping the nest clean. The advertisement of the 
nest-stains on the leaves below is a matter of indifference to these bold and ~ 
persistent outlaws, who have little to fear from any enemy save men.” | 


Mr. Witi1am Cross, the well-known dealer in living zoological speci- 
mens, died at Liverpool on April 7th. Mr. Cross belonged to a family of 
naturalists. His father ana grandfather were in their day the best known 
importers of wild beasts and birds in this country. In the early part of 
last century the Exeter Change, in the Strand, was the rendezvous of 
collectors eager to purchase the latest arrivals sent to the proprietor, Mr. 
Edward Cross. In London fifty-eight years ago Mr. Cross was born, but 
it was in Liverpool, near the North Docks, that he established his famous 
emporium. Scarcely a ship arrived at Liverpool from China, India, 
Australia, Africa, and America without having on board zoological speci- 
mens for Mr. Cross from his agents throughout the world, whom he had 
distributed. Thousands upon thousands of wild animals have passed 
through his emporium to owners of public and private collections or retail 
dealers. In twelve years he imported over a million Parrots, besides birds 
of every variety and from every clime. Twenty-eight years ago he brought 
to Liverpool a live Gorilla—the first that had. been seen in Europe—and 
sold it to the Berlin Aquarium for no less than £1000. In private life 
Mr. Cross was known as a staunch teetotaler, and a keen supporter of all 
philanthropic movements. 


WE regret to announce the death of an eminent zoologist in the person 
of Prof. M. Milne Edwards, Director of the Natural History Museum at the 
Jardin des Plantes, Paris, who died suddenly on April 21st, in his sixty- 
sixth year. 


THE ZOOLOGIST 


No. 708.—June, 1900. 


ON SEXUAL DIFFERENCES IN THE 
FEATHERING OF THE WING. 


By Ep. DEGEn. 


Unprr this heading Dr. A. G. Butler has published (Zool. 
1898, pp. 104, 105) his observations made on the Sky-Lark 
(Alauda arvensis), and more recently again (ante, pp. 74, 75) the 
results of his investigations in regard to the House-Sparrow 
(Passer domesticus). Unquestionably any additional knowledge of 
birds whose plumage, on account of the great similarity existing 
between the two sexes, offer such great difficulties in distinguish- 
ing between them, as the Sky-Lark and many others, will be not 
only appreciated by the aviculturist, but also by the ornithologist 
and student, the fuller such information is afforded. That 
differences in the area of the bird’s wings of the two sexes exist, 
at any rate for the species referred to above, has been shown by 
Dr. Butler in the respective dimensions of their wings. More 
important, however, are the deductions he makes therefrom, 
other than mere sexual differentiation; especially when he calls 
attention to a possible advantage in power of flight acquired by 
the male bird over the female, induced by a slight increase 
in the wing-feather area—in those cases, at least, as he points 
out, where a reduction in the weight of the body, as in the male 
Dunlin, does not take place. 

_As I happen to possess a series of over thirty specimens of 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., June, 1900. 8 


250 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


the Black-backed Crow-Shrike, or Piping Crow (Gymnorhina 
tibicen), erroneously, but very persistently, called Magpie by the 
colonists, collected during my stay in Australia, I decided, after 
reading with interest Dr. Butler’s remarks on the subject, to 
seize the opportunity for trying to ascertain from such ample 
material the extent to which this principle might affect this par- 
ticular species. 

Dr. Butler’s method for measuring the dried and mounted 
wing consists in ascertaining its length from the upper head of 
the upper arm-bone to the extreme tip of the longest of the flight- 
feathers, which is situated on the hand portion. Since any 
difference in the measurements can therefore only be the result 
of this longest of the primaries itself, I came to the inevitable 
conclusion that in this way no information at all is procurable in 
regard to the extent to which the rest of the remiges participate 
on the area of wing for supposed sexual difference, an adjunct of 
no mean importance in this question. To supply this deficiency 
necessitated the measuring of all the flight-feathers separately, 
on one side at least, which in the present case was that of the 
left-hand wing. ‘This process was rendered somewhat easier 
from the fact that only three of the specimens examined were 
dry skins, all the others being preserved in spirit. There are 
ten primaries and also ten secondaries in the wing of this species. 
By commencing to count the primaries from the tip of the wing 
inwards, as Dr. Butler has done, the fourth flight-feather is 
found to be the longest of all. This makes this remex identical 
with the corresponding one of the song-birds proper, or Oscines, 
in which group it has been considered to be the third, owing to 
the “‘assumed” absence of the first or outermost remex. For 
this reason I have here followed the practice now generally 
adopted by systematists of counting the primaries from within— 
that is, the carpal joint, outwards to the extreme end. By doing 
this it will be found that the longest primary in this species is 
the seventh in number, same as in the case of the song-birds, 
where there is supposed to be one less, namely, the tenth. 

All my measurements are expressed in millimetres. The 
highest figures for the seventh, or the longest primary, obtained 
for the twenty-seven specimens examined, are the following :— 


SHXUAL DIFFERENCES IN WING FEATHERING. 251 


For an adult male sil os 1.7219 mom. 
For ajuvenile male ___... as sag ia lame ay 
For an adult female oa ee Sheth ane 
For a juvenile female... fi ee eer toes 
The lowest figures obtained for the same quill-feather were :— 
For an adult male vat if ap BOO Ws 
For a juvenile male fe ae seus eNO ag 
For an adult female ae eh MOON gs 
For a juvenile female ... cP Ee On fs 


It will be noticed from the foregoing figures that, as far as 
difference of sex is concerned, there is a marked excess of length 
for this longest of the flight-feathers in both the old and the 
young individual male birds over the females of from 7 to 
14mm. We thus find Dr. Butler’s conclusions fully confirmed 
when confining ourselves to this feather exclusively, but if the 
same test be applied to a considerable number of individuals we 
not only get every degree of length possible for this quill 
amongst the two sexes, but as a matter of fact the same indi- 
vidual variation manifests itself in all the other flight-feathers. 
For this longest one, then, we get a range from a maximum 
of 219 mm. to a minimum of 200 mm. for adult males; the 
latter being smaller by 5 mm. to female individuals, both old and 
young, which is that of 205 mm. 

If the relative lengths range for the adult males between 
219 to 200, for the young males from 212 to 200, they do the 
same in the case of the females, which for the adults is one of 
from 205 to 190, and one of 205 to 192 in young females. 

A reproduction of the table of measurements of all the twenty 
flight-feathers in the wings of these twenty-seven birds would 
serve no useful purpose, as may be gleaned from the following 
example, applying to the first specimen composing the list of 


birds measured :— 
Primaries. 


Poe VIE VIP VE VO TW EET 

mm, 105 176: 209. 212 210 195 169 159 150 145 
Secondaries. 

re ce LE ey OM OV LS NO OEE OX 

Pan "138 132 128 121 118° 112 105” 95; 70 


Sum total, 2889. Formula for index, 2 eee ce = index, 
20 (remiges) 


144°4. $2 


252 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Not only does this index afford a means for a comparison of 
the specimens, but it should have the advantage also of giving a 
more accurate estimate of the real flight-feather area. 

Table I. has been compiled from the indices thus obtained by 
placing them side by side, according to the respective sex and 
approximate age of the specimens, and in serial order of 
diminishing figures of these indices. | 

On the whole, the result of this investigation for eliciting 
additional evidence in proof of the establishment of a clearly 
defined line between males and females from the point of differ- 
ence in the length of the flight-feathers cannot be said to have 
been a very satisfactory one—at any rate, not for this particular 
species. The same may very reasonably be inferred from the 
genus as a whole, to which this species belongs. ; 

On the other hand, and which Table I. shows also, it has been 
productive of supplying an approximate estimation of the rates 
of percentages at which the two sexes participate in the maxima 
and the minima of excess or reduction respectively. Thus 
18°5 per cent., or five males only, absolutely exceed in greatest 
length of flight-feathers; the 59°83 per cent.=nineteen individuals, 
indiscriminately represent males and females, as well as every 
range of length; these are Nos. 6 to 21 of Table I., or consider- 
ably over the half of this large series of birds. Of females, six 
only are absolutely inferior in length, forming 22°2 per cent. of 
the whole. By dealing, however, separately with the sexes, the 
five males just referred to, out of a total of sixteen, with abso- 
lutely higher indices, form 31°2 per cent. Similarly, of the 
eleven individuals constituting the female portion, six of them 
show indices absolutely inferior to the remaining seven, or 
54°5 per cent., a little over the half for females.* 

The measurements obtained for the seventh or longest pri- 
mary, when compared with the indices derived from the aggre- 
gates of all the flight-feathers in the wing, do not coincide always 


* These birds are a non-migratory species, and the greater proportion of 
males to females in a collection made in the same locality as this one was, 
may be taken as a fair estimate for the proportion of the sexes in a free 
state. This probably accounts also for the great number of them existing still, 
although they were considerably disturbed by the influx of the white popula- 
tion settling everywhere in the country. 


* SEXUAL DIFFERENCES IN WING FEATHERING. — 253 


exactly with the rank which has been allotted to the specimen on 
the list, the latter being the outcome of the index received. As 
an instance, the first specimen on the list (Table I.), whose index 
is 144°4, has its longest remex shorter by 2 mm. than the corre- 
sponding one of No. 4, whose index of 141°4 is so much lower. 
The adult male No. 2, with its inferior index of 1484, exceeds 
the young male No. 1 by 7 mm. in the longest primary, which 
measures 219 mm., and is the longest of all. These examples 
should suffice for showing the great individual variations obtain- 
ing throughout alike. Not more than five males exceeding the 
others by highest indices, also exceed them by having the longest 
measures for the seventh primary. 

It is obvious, then, that as a means of diagnosis for the deter- 
mination of sexes, a really characteristic difference in the lengths 


of the wing, or wing-feathers, found to exist in the species 


dealt with by Dr. Butler, has almost broken down in this par- 
ticular case. 

In addition to the indices on Table I., I have appended a 
further column, in which the length and the girth of the beaks 
are given. A comparison of these dimensions in their present 
order of indices—with which they in no way agree, any more 
than amongst themselves—does not exactly afford a ready 
means for discriminating between them. To achieve this latter 
purpose better, I have dealt with this character separately on 
Table II. by numbering the specimens according to the diminish- 
ing lengths of their beaks, but otherwise adhering to the plan 
adopted in Table I. 

The arrangement of Table II. therefore shows that, apart 
from the differences in the colour of the plumage on the backs 
between adult males and females of this species, which does not 
enter into the scope of this work, a very good character for sexual 
difference, and of greater reliability than we have seen to exist for 
dimensions of wings, lies in the length of the beak. 

With one exception only, namely, that of an adult male 
(No. 25 of Table II.), which is conspicuous by having an abnor- 
mally short beak (like the two young females at the bottom of 
the list), all females have their beaks inferior in length to the 
males; but nevertheless there is, as might be expected, great 
individual variation perceptible also in both sexes, 


254 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Very little positive value should be attached to the girth 
measurements taken at the base of the beaks, as may be inferred 
by a consultation of the columns devoted to these on Table II., 
which may be noticed particularly in the case of the three dry 
skin specimens distinguished from the others by an asterisk, and 
mentioned before. They prove in a striking manner that con- 
siderable shrinkage takes place on drying out, which, if ignored 
when admitting this measurement for a comparison of fresh with 
cabinet specimens, may lead to erroneous deductions. 


TABLE I. 
INDICES OF FLIGHT-FEATHERS. 


MALES. FEMALES. BEAKS. 


Old. Young. Old. Young. +  |Length| Girth 


ae mm. | mm. 
= ol epee eee TAMA) aytracastadilin: cone 10 “|: GOy jared 
© BON LABIA. 2c eta Sena a eee 14 | 50 | 70 
Ns ELT toms Fy a Pee etal, Cee | Peat 6 | 53 | 70 
10 7S: Rae ky Sm eer Pie ok Asc VeVi Rae 7) 6a) a0 
a Be (1400's. | pechatneell Ceemenene eel cree ieee 8 | 65 | 70 
igh Bae ier i eieliins: bee a 139°7 | 19 | 48 | 66 

(Ai ie se ete Nie A 8 | 62 | 7 

ey Ean 180%4 Jiees alas deren 2. | by elaaa 

Na ar cscesus-|Atues crened iemnee eee 1886 | 17 | 48 | 7 

TORR ie ten Re CR PR a. 9 «| Sones 

Bk(o tl | 0488-0" iol_.:.a..ncleeeeaas alee 11 | 50) }exe 
1 RIM ROA rae a NR es MR 1879 | 20 | 48 | = 
oh cag Peete eae 1STRE cece 23 | 47 | 69 
ART [asl os Map ene a pee al Sao) 1370 | 16 | 49 | 68 
SOAS As LEGO” |. acs. eepeadep mere eels eee 4 |) Sars 
Se 16 el ke Te eek Let ate, ae 5 | 54 | 69 
7 Gin Pee Pe LSS Ogio Gay cst 15 | 50 | 68 
TRE Sas TBD Been oa shane ones sete 12 | 60 ene 

1S) 18555 eee teense 25 | 46 | 67 

Boag he teats 1 Spee ee ye 1 | Veta 

(ES A Re Rae LBB T Minuetaeatssteelionndevoraee 18°,| O05 iene 

(| fhe Kel Meee REBELS resin 1313 | 27 | 44 | 64 
BANOS, Ci. 0c cca eee OP Rha ees 24 | 46 | 75 
AD) NO eg Pare PRE 2 1298 | 21 | 48 | 62% 
BAR OD.« \osscctuesrecareleieeeve see amr es 1298 | 18 | 48 | 68 
Surg 2G tyes -Pine ceil ae Cale a Bee 92 | 48 | 62! 
BEGAN ilvess nesinns ane (scene cee eee 1249 | 26 | 45 | 62} 


* Serial numbers of specimens in diminutive order of their indices. 


+ Numbers referring to serial arrangement of Table II. (first column). 
} Dried skins. 


SEXUAL DIFFERENCES IN WING FEATHERING. 


TABLE II. 
DIMENSIONS OF BEAKS. 


MALES. 
No. * 

Old. Young 
Lee 57—75 
RE ec siisecascess 57—70 
3 SM FMT T lose ule cc cceeiesuen’e 
4 ee *) lt css vesemewoeatesia 
BOM erst ice es ss ctees 54—69 
6 EL Venvetaacesce ceeaue 
7 ee PO Ts Scie ssetwepeiesswas 
8 Pe hae levscassdesSasea vee 
9 Berea aaa deate cities ls Sene's 
ere 50—71 
11 IAL lcauutle esas caieres 
OU 50—70 
Oa alvup'sos sie eees 50—70 
14 ee tO acs secede aeons von 
MME To scldaccxssccecccee 50—68 
oe ea re 
0 ae ee 
SMT Le oc cceesl sve deeiedevccweesss 
EEE akc hoc e cel ssecvatecccecsacue 
NM rc eied cucleics |oaviene sesiesoasvnes 
Oe oo ce psn sis ee voecacensies 
een sco kcc|sssccdevecesaecsest 
ER Es Ui Scic-vic'| veiw sldvas's cave Ge db 
DMPC eacscbnce|secnetascectecect's 
25 Se oN cantare nstckea vee 
oo a 
ET rigccnceceslssscseiies vee seenes 


FEMALES. 


Old. 


Young. 


eeoecoeesereeecesee 


eeoneeerecseesesses 
@eeceeeeeseeseeses 
eoeereseesesseeees 
eoeoveeesereeseeees 
eeoresessseeeesses 
eeovecereeseesesens 
eeeeeese> ceoeseseee 
eeeececeseeeeeesen 
eocesersesseresses 
eeecoseeeseseesese 
eeeseeseneeaseeses 
eeoeeeeseeesseeeses 
Ceoerreereseseresses 
eeeeoorecsceecesccs 
@eecseereeseesseces 
eoeerrerereeseecrese 
eeeesetesessessese 
eeeeceeserooecesere 
eceereseeeeeeeeeece| 


eeecesessesesesece 


@eeceseseseseresoe 
eoeeeeoereescesere 


eeeeesesereeseesses 


seoeeseeeereseeeese 


eeeeeereeeeeesesee 


eeeeersessesees ees 


@oereeeesecsesescse 


@eeeesecesseseeeses 


Peereeeresesessese 


@eeeeeeorceseseses 


* Serial numbers, with diminutive length of beaks. _ 
+ Numbers referring to serial arrangement of Table I. (first column). 
t Dried skins. 


255 


256 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


LAND BIRDS AT SEA. 


By Lieut. Ropert E. Vaueuan, R.N. 


Tue published notes in the ‘Zoologist’ under the above 
heading by Surgeon K. Hurlestone Jones, R.N. (ante, p. 51), and 
Mr. Malcolm Burr (ante, p. 144) greatly interested me, and have 
caused me to read up my own note-book and write a few words 
on the subject, more especially as I can add some fresh species 
to the list. 

Dr. Hurlestone Jones mentions having recognized eleven 
species, while Mr. Burr makes mention of six. My list of land 
birds contains fourteen species, of which six have appeared in 
the two previous lists, and bring the total number under obser- 
vation up to twenty-three. 

My observations are of a recent date, extending from 
Sept. 10th to Oct. 16th, 1899, whilst travelling between Aden 
and Plymouth, and during the season of autumnal migration. 

I happened to be returning to England from Australia in 
H.M.S. ‘ Royalist,’ a small vessel, barque-rigged, and conse- 
quently supplied with numerous spars and ropes, which would 
form ample and convenient resting-places for any chance avian 
visitors, or passengers, as I may call some of them, seeing that a 
few remained on board for about a couple of days. 

We left Sydney, Australia, on July 7th, and on the 8th, at 
sunset, a Noddy Tern (Anous stolidus) settled on one of the 
boats’ davits and went to sleep, where I succeeded in capturing 
it. This is somewhat of a digression, but is worth recording. 
The Noddy is essentially a pelagic bird, which, being the case, 
I think makes its occurrence on board all the more noticeable, 
as it could have slept on the water in comfort, as the weather 
was fine. In fact, this is the first time during some years afloat 
that I have seen any sea bird settle on a vessel at sea, though 


when at anchor it is not unusual for some of the Larideé to 
settle for a while, 


LAND BIRDS AT SEA. 257 


No other bird visited us till after we had left Aden, on 
Sept. 10th, and were entering the Red Sea on the 12th, when a 
Hoopoe (Upupa epops) arrived during the night, and was dis- 
covered at sunrise. The efforts of a sailor in trying to catch it 
frightened the bird away, and it failed to return. 

Next day, Sept. 13th, a Golden Oriole (Oriolus galbula, female) 
arrived and settled on top of the awning. This time the sailor 
did catch it by the tail, which was all the bird left behind in the 
hands of the astonished tar, and O. galbula flew away southwards, 
steering a most ungainly and awkward course. No sooner had 
she gone than a Collared Turtle-Dove (Turtur risorwus) arrived 
and settled on the jibboom, where it stayed till the afternoon, 
when it also flew off towards some land which was in sight. 

The next afternoon, while I was on watch, a Greenfinch 
(Ligurinus chloris), flying across the Red Sea from east to 
west, flew in at one of our gunports, across the deck, and out 
through the opposite port, and was soon lost sight of. I consider 
this a most odd and unnecessary proceeding, and the bird acted 
as if it was being pursued by a Hawk, although no such bird 
was in sight. 

Daybreak next morning revealed two Turtle-Doves (Jurtur 
communis), which had, I suppose, been attracted during the 
night by our lights, and about 9 a.m. they were joined by three 
more, the whole party remaining with us for the day and sleeping 
at night, two in the maintop and three on the topsail yard. 
Next morning, Saturday, the 16th, three of our friends the Turtle- 
Doves had disappeared, and the remaining two stayed with us 
all that day, and did not leave till the following forenoon, when 
the weather, which had been a flat calm, changed, and a fresh 
breeze sprung up. 

Although these two Turtle-Doves (presuming they were the 
same, an assumption that seems allowable) had been with us over 
fifty-six hours, they had nothing in the way of food. It causes 
one to wonder what are a bird’s fasting capacities, especially on 
migration. I tried to tempt them with peas, &c., spread out on 
the awning, but they refused to come down from aloft. 

This afternoon I noticed, through a telescope, a flock of 
between forty and fifty birds, which I believed to be Greenfinches 
(L. chloris); but they were rather brightly coloured, and may 


258 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


have been the African variety of this bird (or the Ligurinus 
aurantiiventris of the followers of Dr. Cabanis). They were flying 
in the same direction as the Finch previously mentioned, very 
low, only about two feet above the water. ‘This was the only 
flock of any species I saw during the five weeks I was observing 
land birds. 

Later in the afternoon a Quail (Coturnix communis) flew on 
board and settled on the nettings (or bulwarks, as they are called 
by landsmen). A marine tried to catch it, but it rose, and flying 
round the ship settled again in the same place. ‘Then another 
attempt was made, with the same result; and seven times did 
this bird settle on its originally selected spot, only to be stalked 
by various members of the crew, who tried to catch it with their 
caps, &c. After trying an eighth time to settle, it changed its 
mind and eventually flew away. I don’t know why the bird 
should have persistently chosen to settle on the same spot each 
time and meet with the same welcome, considering the ship was 
over two hundred feet long and there were many more comfort- 
able and secluded spots where it would have been out of sight of 
everyone. 

On getting into the Gulf of Suez next day at about 4 p.m., 
we were visited by three representatives of the family Hirundi- 
nide, and Her Majesty’s Government that night provided well- 
aired lodgings, free, for three Swallows (Hirundo rustica), one 
House-Martin (Chelidon urbica), and three Sand-Martins (Cotile 
riparia). One of the latter and one of the former were caught 
and brought to me. The Swallow, when released, began to 
twitter; and I may say of all the birds I saw during our passage 
home this was the only one that uttered a note of any sort. The 
silence of our bird visitors (although they were not representatives 
of our most garrulous British species) was most apparent, and I 
cannot understand why it was they should all have been mute. 

At the entrance to the Canal we were met by an Egyptian 
Vulture (Neophron percnopterus), who escorted and saw us safely 
into the Bitter Lake, although he did not perch on board. After 
he left, a Willow Wren (Phylloscopus trochilus) flew on board. A 
most restless little bird it was, flying all over the ship and 
creeping about the ropes, where, finding nothing in the way of 
insect life or refreshment, it left us at Ismailia. 


LAND BIRDS AT SEA. 259 


We did not receive another visitor till three days out from 
Port Said, on 23rd September, when a Wheatear (Saxicola 
enanthe) came to tea and slept the night. Next morning another 
had arrived, and a little later a Redstart (Ruticilla phoenicurus) 
put in an appearance. ‘The Wheatears left in the afternoon for 
the south-east, and the Redstart made itself quite at home on 
one of the guns. It so happened that a sailor was turning out 
his ‘‘ bag”’ (which is a nautical receptacle for clothes), and the 
ship during her twelve years in Australia had collected a very 
fine breed of Cockroaches. As the sailor was shaking out a 
jumper a Cockroach was jerked out on to the deck in front of the 
Redstart, who pounced down and greedily devoured it. That 
started half the crew Cockroach-catching, in which I joined 
myself, and there never was a pampered bird so banqueted 
before. I gave it eleven, and it was fed till dark; the capacity 
_ of its stomach was truly remarkable. 

During the night our ship’s terrier caught a small bird, which 
I believe was a Whitethroat from an examination of the chewed 
_ remains in the morning. 

On sighting Malta, our friendly Redstart left us and flew 
away, not towards the land, but in a southerly direction towards 
the African coast; so I imagine the Redstart did not perch on 
board us for the sole purpose of resting, but had iost its way, 
and on its seeing Malta it recognised a landmark in the route 
southwards, and proceeded on its migratory course. The weather 
was fine all the way from Suez. 

I never sighted another land bird till we were forty miles 
off the Land’s End, when, in a strong north-easterly gale on 
Oct. 15th, a Song Thrush (Turdus musicus) flew on board. I 
never saw a more slovenly untidy bird, but as it was the first to 
welcome me home after an absence of five years from England, I 
forgave it its slatternly appearance. It didn’t stay long, and, 
after trying vainly to fly to windward, turned tail, and was blown 
away on a course which would have eventually landed it in 
South America. Earlier in the morning I had seen a Duck 
(sp. inc.) very high up and flying very fast towards Ushant; but 
I can hardly include this in the list, as I failed to recognise the 
species. ‘That completes my list of birds, and H.M.S. ‘ Royalist’ 
arrived next day at Falmouth. 


260 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


On reviewing the three lists I find the Turtle Dove (7. 
communis) appears in all three, and as I have observed it ona 
previous occasion, it seems to be quite a common visitor, and 
one feels inclined to wonder if it is gifted with insufficient powers 
of flight to cope with the great strain put on the species at this 
period of the year. 

The same remark certainly cannot apply to the Hirundinide, 
yet they appear on my list and Dr. Hurlestone Jones’s, and I 
can remember in 18938 catching three Swallows (H. rustica) in 
April when serving as a middy in H.M.S. ‘Calypso.’ Unfor- 
tunately I did not keep a note-book in those days, but we were 
somewhere between the Land’s End and the south of the Irish 
coast. By the way, the Wheatear appears on all three of our 
lists. 

Why do birds settle on ships—that is the question? One 
reason undoubtedly is the attraction of lights at night, especially 
the powerful white light which all steam vessels carry. For 
example :—One night, when off the Australian coast, a Red-tailed 
Tropic bird (Phaéthon rubricauda, Boda) flew up against the mast 
this light was on, and, having stunned itself, fell on to the deck, 
where I picked it up, and skinned it. Its two long tail feathers 
were fortunately undamaged. 

During autumn a vessel steering north in the Red Sea, where 
most of the birds on my list were observed, would meet, and 
attract, birds flying in a southerly direction. Several birds I 
have mentioned arrived and perched during the night. 

But what about the daytime? In some cases, notably that of 
the Turtle-Doves, land was in sight all day, yet they did not 
leave us. The Red Sea is no great distance across at its widest 
part, and is well provided with littoral islands, offering many 
resting-places where the birds would be free from molestation. 
The only really weary wayfarer was the Quail, which appeared 
completely fatigued, and only rose at the last moment to avert 
capture. 

In the Suez Canal, for example, the Willow Wren must 
have visited us out of pure curiosity, as it left a green and 
favourable-looking locality to perch on board. 

The silence of birds on board I have already touched on, also 
the question of hunger. 


ne 


LAND BIRDS AT SEA. 261 


As some of your readers are afloat, I appeal to them to make 
use of the ample opportunities that occur, principally in spring 
and autumn, for studying land birds that come on board. Some 
annotated observations on them re the two above-mentioned 
points would, I am sure, be of interest. 

The majority of vessels in the navy now having merely pole 
masts and nothing in the way of rigging, but plenty in the way 
of funnels and ventilators, fail to offer the perching attractions 
that a masted vessel does. 

When one starts discussing birds, the subject is so interesting 
that it can be spun out to an indefinite length, and the points in 
their economy that are after all only slightly known are many. 
I only hope that in writing these few notes and observations 
I have not wearied the patience of the reader. | 


262 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


HOW DOES THE CUCKOO CARRY HER EGG? 


By A. H. MErIKLEJoHN. 


On May 12th, while on the road between the villages of 
Hamstreet and Woodchurch, in Kent, I had, to me, the unique 
experience of seeing a Cuckoo in the very act of placing its egg 
in the nest of a Robin. The facts are briefly as follows:—I 
happened to be sitting down by the roadside watching a Wryneck 
through my glasses, when a Cuckoo flew over my head, and, 
turning sharply, alighted on a fence-rail about two hundred yards 
down the road. From there she flew across and entered the 
opposite hedge, which was raised on a bank covered with a thick 
undergrowth of nettles, grass, &c. The Cuckoo had scarcely 
disappeared before she again re-appeared with a small bird in 
close pursuit, in which two or three Starlings, which evidently 
had young in the farm-steading opposite, joined. At this moment 
a man passing in a cart disturbed the Cuckoo, which, flying over 
the hedge, alighted in the meadow beyond. Noticing the bird’s 
apparent disinclination to leave the place, I walked down the 
road and lay quietly on the grass opposite to, and at a distance 
of twelve yards (paced) from, the spot where the Cuckoo first 
entered the hedge. I had not sat there for more than two 
minutes when back came the Cuckoo, gliding along the hedge, 
and finally alighting with a loud squawk exactly opposite me. 
What struck me at once from this and many subsequent views 
of the bird was the swollen appearance of her throat, which 
half-way down showed a distinct protuberance, as might well 
have been caused by an egg. I several times turned my glasses 
on her, and at that short range I could plainly see the feathers 
sticking out over the distended part of her gullet; and, as my 
subsequent remarks will show, it seems to me that this swelling 
was caused by her egg. From the moment of alighting to the 
close of this domestic tragedy, the Cuckoo was attacked with the 


— 


HOW DOES THE CUCKOO CARRY HER EGG? 263 


utmost fury by the pair of Robins, upon whose nest she desired 
to “‘board”’ her offspring. Again and again the little birds 
struck and buffeted her; and, on two occasions, one of the 
Robins seized hold of the Cuckoo by the back of the neck and 
hung on for a few seconds with all the fierce tenacity of a 
bull-dog. Whenever the Robins made one of their ferocious 
dives, the Cuckoo threw back her head, opened her great orange- 
coloured gape, and squawked loudly—ergo, her egg was not 
carried in her bill. ‘Twice the Cuckoo disappeared into a recess 
at the root of a hawthorn, and this the Robins in no way re- 
sented. Hmerging the second time from this recess, the Cuckoo, 


in spite of the fiercest opposition, alighted with out-spread wings 
and in a sprawling attitude about three yards further up the 


hedge. Here, pausing for an instant, during which the Robins got 
terribly excited, the Cuckoo made a sudden dash amongst the 
grass and disappeared entirely, except for the end of her tail, 
which was sticking out and in full view all the time. In two or 


three seconds she reappeared, and flew straight away out of 


sight, and so quickly that I was unable to see whether the pro- 
tuberance in her throat had subsided or not. At once springing 


up, Il ran across the road to the very spot where she had gone 


in. I put in my hand and felt three eggs, one of which was 
moist and slightly sticky,—and this egg proved to be that of the 
Cuckoo. I then went down and examined the recess which she 
had previously twice entered, and found to my astonishment a 
Robin’s nest from which, by its appearance, the young had but 
lately flown—and in the hedge I saw a young Robin hopping 
about. What was the Cuckoo’s reason for going to the old nest 
first ? That this nest was in the same place as that which she 
had remembered as the last year’s nursery for her egg seems to 
be one explanation. 

In support of my conviction that this Cuckoo carried her 


egg in her throat, may I be allowed to re-state the following 


facts ? :— 

I. She constantly opened her mouth to utter her continuous 
squawks of protest,—her egg, therefore, was not carried in her 
bill. 

II. Her tail being visible to me all the time she was engaged 
at the nest, she did not lay her egg in the usual way. 


264 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


III. The egg was moist and slightly sticky. 

IV. The distended appearance of a certain region of her 
throat, as shown in the rough sketch below, might well have 
been caused by the egg. 


( 265 ) 


NOTES UPON THE ZOOLOGICAL MEETING 
OF PAVIA. 


By Count Errore ARRIGONI DEGLI ODDI. 


Two months ago a Committee, composed of the most illustrious 
Italian zoologists, invited their colleagues to a meeting which 
_ was to be held at Pavia on the 22nd and 28rd of April, 1900. 
The purpose of this meeting was to found a ‘“ National Zoo- 
logical Union,” and to facilitate and make possible an Annual 
Congress of Naturalists, which could only be done by long pre- 
paration. Amongst the subscribers may be mentioned the 
following University Professors :—Camerano (Turin), Cattaneo 
and Parona (Genoa), Emery (Bologna), Pavesi and Maggi 
(Pavia), Giglioli (Florence), Monticelli (Naples), and some ~ 
others. 

Many Italian zoologists approved of so useful and opportune 
an intention, and at the opening of the meeting in the Municipal 
Hall of Pavia several were present. 

The President in the chair was Prof. P. Pavesi, a man dear 
to science and his friends, who is at the same time an illustrious 
naturalist, an appreciated politician, and now Mayor of Pavia. 
He warmly welcomed all those present, and stated he was pleased 
that the beginning of this Union should take place at Pavia. 
After the vino d’onore, Prof. Emery, of Bologna, thanked Pavesi 
for his kind welcome, and added some other opportune phrases. 
The first meeting took place at one o'clock in the Anatomical 
Hall, in order to decide if it would be useful to have a ‘ Zoo- 
logical Union” in Italy, and in this case to establish a scheme 
of statutes, and to name a temporary Committee. This meeting 
was presided over by Prof. Pavesi, having as a Secretary 
Miss Rina Monti, a young and clever naturalist. About forty 
persons were present, and amongst them I am pleased to mention 
Emery, Parona, Cattaneo, Maria Sacchi, Andres, Maggi, Mar- 


Zool, 4th ser. vol. IV., June, 1400. 7 


266 THE ZOOLOGIST. 2 
torelli, Monticelli, Coggi, Giacomini, Damiani, Ghigi, Picaglia, 
Magretti, Rosa, &c. 

After interesting discussions the following statutes were pro- 
visionally approved :— 

That an Association be established in Italy in order to 
diffuse and to advance zoology, and also to facilitate rapports 
amongst the lovers of this science, as understood in its fullest 
meaning, and to defend the interests of the teachers. That 
it take the name of the ‘‘ Italian Zoological Union.” That the 
number of its members be unlimited. That the “‘ Union” shall 
have no fixed place of residence; that every year an ordinary 
meeting will take place in any Italian town fixed upon by the 
members, but that eventually arrangements may be made for 
extraordinary meetings. That its Council be composed of a 
President, two vice-Presidents,a Secretary (to be also a Treasurer), 
and a vice-Secretary ; the duration of office to be for three years, 
and no re-election be allowed except in the case of the Secretaries. 
That the ‘‘ Union” publish a simple bulletin with the names 
of its members—the “social bill’’—the verbal proceedings of 
the meetings of the Committee and of the general meetings, 
and a short summary of the scientific work. The other matters 
which were established refer to the ordinary rules of the statutes, 
and are not generally interesting. 

Ultimately the temporary President, Pavesi, delicately re- 
signed, in order to leave the assembly free to elect whom it 
would ; but he was asked to stand for the presidential chair, 
and was unanimously elected. The Secretary was Miss Rina 
Monti. The entire Committee will be chosen at the first annual 
general meeting. 

The next day another meeting took place, when it was 
decided that the first assembly should be at Bologna, at the end 
of next September, and Prof. Ghigi of that town returned 
thanks for this choice, saying that Bologna would be proud of 
the decision. After a long discussion, on the proposal to have 
a zoological journal in Italy, and regarding the means to support 
it, a Commission was nominated, composed of the well-known 
Professors Emery, Cattaneo, and Monticelli, who will examine the 
question, and give the result at the next general meeting. At the 
conclusion the late proposed law of Minister Baccelli was fully 


THE ZOOLOGICAL MEETING OF PAVIA. 267 


_ discussed with regard to the teaching of natural history in secondary 
schools, and a motion was carried that the actual hours for study 
of natural history teaching, and particularly of zoology, be main- 
tained as they are; that the same teaching be given only and 
exclusively by the Doctors in Natural Science, and it was decided 
that this be communicated to all the Natural History Societies of 
Italy, and afterwards communicated to the Ministry. 

This concluded the meeting. On the same day a tablet was 
unveiled to the memory of that celebrated naturalist, Spallanzani, 
with a very masterly speech, delivered by Prof. Pavesi. A dinner 
afterwards took place. 

To illustrate the real importance of a Zoological Union in any 
country-is unnecessary. It certainly does not need any words, 
and every Italian naturalist will be grateful to Prof. Pavesi and 
his friends for this step. Before finishing these few notes I would 
express the wish that the newly founded Italian Zoological Society 
(Rome) will join itself to this Italian Zoological Union, and so 
make together a force and unite all the Italian zoologists in the 
best friendship for the advancement of our cherished science. 


268 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


BIRDS ON THE RIGI. 
By Rev. CHartes W. Benson, LL.D. 


In July, 1899, I was Chaplain under the Colonial and Conti- 
nental Society at Rigi Kaltbad, and had an opportunity of 
observing the birds at different heights on the Rigi, not usually 
enjoyed by those making a very short stay in this truly delightful 
locality. 

Although I was unsparing in my endeavours to note any birds 
from Rigi Kaltbad (4791 ft.) to Rigi Kulm (5900 ft.), I could 
only make a list of about twenty-six species, as follows :— 


KEstrEL F'atcon.—Not common. 

CarRION-Crow.— Very numerous. 

NutTcracKER.—Nesting near the path to Kiissnacht. 

MistLe-THRusH.—F airly numerous. 

Sone-THrusH and Bracxsirp. — To be heard singing below Rigi 
Kaltbad. 

Rine-OuzeL.—Very numerous, and taking the place of the Blackbird 
with us. Called ‘‘ Berg Drossel” by the Swiss. 

Buack Repstart.— Very numerous everywhere on the Rigi. 

Common Repstart.—To be found in more sheltered places. 

Wren.— Very numerous. 

GotpcrEst.—Not so plentiful. 

BriackcaP WarBLER.—Near Rigi Staffel at height of over 5000 ft. 

CuirrcHaFF. — Breeding near Rigi Kaltbad Hotel. These were the 
only Warblers on the mountain. 

Ropin.—In the woods ; not very common. 

CHAFFINCH.—Rather numerous. 

ButurincH.—Fairly plentiful. 

Lesser Reprotyt.—Tolerably numerous. 

Coat Tir (Parus ater).—Numerous. : 

Sisxin.—The bird of the Rigi. Very numerous everywhere, in small 
flocks, flying and singing. Some cocks in beautiful plumage. 

SpotreD FiycatcHeR.—Fairly common. 

GREEN WooDPECKER.—To be heard every day. 

TreE Prieit.—Fairly numerous. 


BIRDS ON THE A&IGI. 269 


Merapow-Pipit.— Common. 

Warer-Prert. — I saw but one, near the Rigi Staffel Hotel. I was 
attracted by its greyish back and the whitish stripe over the eye. 

Waite Waerait.—Not common. 

Swirt (Cypselus apus).—I saw but one, and we were visited with no 
“ Alpensegler,” as the Alpine Swift is usually called. 

In addition to these twenty-six species, I heard two different species of 
Woodpecker, which I could not, see or identify, but think that neither was 
Picus martius, a bird I saw a few years ago at Bex, in the Rhone Valley. 


As I always make it a rule to go upa hill on my birthday, I 
went up Pilatus on July 12th, 1899, and there, at a height of 
about 7000 ft., I saw the Alpine Chough, the Snowfinch, and the 
Rock-Thrush. I heard for the first time the pleasing little song 
of the Snowfinch, and the really delightful song of the Rock- 
Thrush ; but this latter I had heard before at the Hospice of 
St. Bernard in 1896. To my mind the expression ‘“ bursts”’ or 
“snatches” of song best describes this delightful warbling, which 
alone enlivens those dreary and almost inaccessible places. There 
is just one little patch of green near the Hotel Pilatus Kulm, and 
an observer standing above it, and looking over the wall, may see 
these rare birds below him, and hear undisturbed their delightful 
song, with something of the Robin init, and of the Blackcap too. 

I may mention that at the famous “Tunnels” on the Axen- 
strasse, near Brunnen, the Crag Martin may always be found, 
and also at the Gorges du Trient, near Vernayaz, at the Rhone 
Valley. I have also seen the Wall-Creeper near the Tunnels, 
but never yet have I been favoured with a sight of the Alpine 
Accentor, one of the very few Swiss birds whose acquaintance I 
cannot claim. | 


270 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


AN OBSERVATIONAL DIARY OF THE HABITS OF 
THE GREAT PLOVER (GDICNEMUS CREPI- 
TANS) DURING SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER. 


By Epmunp SE.Lovs. 
(Continued from p. 185.) 


September 19th.—Arrived between 11.30 a.m. and 12 o'clock. 
The place seemed deserted. I could discover no birds after 
searching it well with the glasses. On rising to go, however, after 
remaining about half an hour, I put up one bird quite near on the 
edge of the bracken, and, later, three or four others from. right 
amongst the bracken where it was a little thin and open. At 
about 4 p.m. a flight of some thirty or forty Great Plovers flew 
down on the scant (I think, burnt) heather bounding one portion 
of the amphitheatre, there having been none there before. Soon 
after I left. 

September 20th.—Rose early, and, after. some hours spent 
elsewhere, walked across the moor to the road that runs through 
it. Some little time after reaching it—it being now perhaps 
seven or between seven and eight—a large flock of Great Plovers 
flew over the moorland, and came down amongst the heather. 
They were followed by other flocks, all flying in a long, thin, 
irregular line. This made them less difficult to count, and I 
counted upwards of seventy in the largest flock. There must 
have been, I should say, near two hundred in all. A broad bank 
of earth runs near here, through both heather and bracken, 
clothed either with the one or the other, and behind the heathery 
part of this, and near to where a broad gap divides the two, the 
birds went down. Crawling up to this bank, and looking over it, 
I had a near and plain view of them. They were just standing 
and sitting about in the heather, and did not appear occupied 
with anything in particular. Whilst watching them another 
small party flew up, and, my attention being drawn by a note 


<a 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 271 


which I had not heard before, I observed that one of these latter 
birds was pursued by a Hawk—I think, a Sparrow-Hawk. The 
two were close together—in fact, almost touching—the Hawk just 


‘above the Plover, spread like a fan over him, following every 


deviation of his flight, upwards, downwards, to one or another 
side, but sometimes falling just a little behind, though there was 
never a space between them. ‘The two, so to speak, always over- 
lapped. The Hawk, however, did not strike, nor, apparently, 
attempt to, and neither the pursued Plover nor any of the others 
appeared te me much concerned.* I can hardly say why—per- 
haps it was the easy, parachute-like flight of the Hawk, with 
nothing like a swoop or pounce, and the bright clear sunshine 
diffusing an air of joy over everything—but somehow the whole 
thing did not impress me as being in earnest, but rather a sport 
or play. After a little while the Hawk left the Plover, and flew 
off to some distance over the moor, and alighted upon it. The 
cry made by the bird pursued (I assume it was made by that one) 
was so different from the note I had yet heard that I at first 
thought it was the Hawk, which I imagined to be mobbed by the 
Plovers, and in distress. I was soon satisfied that this last was 
not the case, and doubt on the other point was soon removed, for, 
the whole flock of birds shortly rising and flying off, I now heard 
the same note uttered by them all about. It is very different to 
any other one that I have yet heard. Though plaintive, it is not 
nearly so wailing, and more musical. It is a whistling note, with 
a sort of tremulous rise and fall in it (‘‘ tir-whi-whi-whi-whi-whi’’) 
very pleasant to hear, and bringing the sea and beach to one’s 
mind. The whole troop shortly returned, and came down once 
more in the heather, in a little while again rose, circled about, 
flew off, returning again—and did this several times, giving me 
the idea that they are congregating previous to migration, and 
have the restless feelings preceding it. When the birds settled 
they would proceed a little through the heather, making their 
quick short runs with abrupt stops, and following each other, but 
the greater number of them would before long settle down and 
sit about amongst the tufts. ‘They never ran over the tufts, but 
in and out amongst them as we would do. I observed no 
dancing, though altogether I must have had the birds under 
* But I may have been deceived. See pp. 275+6, 


272 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


observation, I should say, at least a couple of hours. Neither | 


did I observe them to be catching insects, or otherwise procuring 
food. Also I note that, except for this new note (‘ tir-whi-whi- — 
whi-whi-whi’’), and for far the greater part of the time, the birds 
flew silently. The whole flight up was in silence until the Hawk 
incident. No cry uttered whilst on the ground. 

At about 5.30 to 6 p.m. I returned to this same bank, distant 
by about some thousand yards from the place where I had first 
seen the birds assembled, and watched them dancing. When 
they had flown off in the evening, they had always gone in one 
direction (towards where I now was), and I wished to see if they 
would again settle on the heather here, or fly on, as I supposed they 
would. Not expecting to find any birds here now, I walked up 
without precaution, and put a good many up from the same place 
as this morning. It was a pity, as I should have liked to have 
noted their behaviour also as the evening came on. I now sat 
down behind the bank, looking over it in the direction of the 
amphitheatre. About 7 p.m. (as I suppose), the moon being 
well risen and bright (full or almost full), the birds began to fly 
up and over me, heralded by their wailing cry. I counted some 
- twenty odd, but most escaped me in the gloom (the moon not 
helping much). They showed no inclination to stop at this 
second place of resort (as I now think it to be), but went right 
away over the country, flying in twos, threes, or fours at irregular 
intervals. Compare this with their morning flight in a great 
flock, silent, or, if not, uttering a quite different note.* 

September 21st.—Walking to the same place as yesterday, I 
concealed myself on one side of the bracken-covered part of the 
bank near the wide gap, and commanding the moor in two 
directions. This must have been about 5.35 or 40 a.m. 

Bright and clear, but breezy and chilly. Rabbits about, but 
not very alert, and as I walked along the road I noticed several 
that sat as if asleep by their burrows. 

Lightening now in the east, but sun not yet visible from behind 
a wooded hill. 

A small flock of Starlings (first bird-life noted) fly by over 
the moor. 


* But this morning flight was with little doubt due to the birds having 
been disturbed, as will shortly appear, 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 273 


Few minutes afterwards cooing of Wood-Pigeons heard in 
distance (more or less) from wooded parts around. 

Sun now risen over crest of hill. 

Some small birds fly over the moor in same direction as Star- 
lings (towards some wooded pieces). 

A Stonechat hovers in the air quite near me (I think, 
examining me), the body seeming always to be in the same 
place, and almost motionless, the wings continually and strongly 
waving. 

Some ten or fifteen minutes later (sun now shining through 
tops of row of tall fir-trees skirting road not far off) a couple of 
Wood-Pigeons fly over the moor, and the cooing becomes more 
en évidence. Then, as the sun crests the fir-trees, a Thrush 
(flying very high for a Thrush) flies over moor. Then seven 
Wood-Pigeons high in air. Small birds now fly over in numerous 
little parties, two often chasing each other in joy and sport, as 
though it were the pairing season. ‘Their twittering is heard 
about, the earth becomes lightened by the rising sun (now well 
over firs), and life really awakes. 

But no sign of the Great Plovers yet. 

Sun well up (twice height of fir-trees), yet no sign of them. 

Must now be getting on for seven. 

Hawk sailing in air some way off, annoyed by quite a cloud 
of small birds. This continues for some time. They do not 
appear to be Swallows, but Buntings (to give a guess), and other 
small Passeres. Hawk makes no endeavour to catch one. 

Splendid day as yet, but sharp and cold. 

In about another quarter of an hour a small flight of Wild 
Duck fly high in air, following course of stream (up stream). 

I now notice some Plovers amongst the heather on other side 
of bank in same place as before. They have, I think, been there 
all the time, but I had taken them for Rabbits, and not used 
the glasses. I cannot make out a dozen. ‘They are quite 
quiescent, all sitting, some preening themselves a little. Search- 
ing the heather thoroughly can make out a few more, equally 
inactive. 

Whilst thus engaged the main body of the birds came by in a 
great flock, flying right over me, many of them, I should think, 
not more than eight to twelve feet above me as I crouched on the 


274 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


ground (perhaps lower). I had just got back to the other side of 
the bank, and raised my head, as it were, into a cloud of birds. 
It was a charming and indescribable sensation, to be thus sud- 


denly surrounded by these free fluttering creatures. They were | 


all about me, and so near. The delicate ‘‘whish, whish” of 
their wings was in my ears, and in my spirit too. I seemed in 
flight myself, and felt how free and how glorious bird-life must 
be. They had taken me quite by surprise, coming up quite 
silently from the direction of the amphitheatre—upwards of one 
hundred at the very least, I should say; but so effectually does 
the heather conceal them that, now they are down with the rest, 
I can only count thirty through the glasses. After running a 
little in their characteristic way, as described, they for the most 
part stand and sit about in the sunny heather. I can now, 
though none have gone up since, only count eleven in the 
heather. 

Another flock—this time a small one—now flies over me, and 
joins the rest. I am again taken by surprise, as I am lying on 
my face, examining the other birds, with my back (or rather my 
heels) turned towards where these come from. Can only tell 
that they fly from the same general direction as the first flight, 
and they also pass exactly over me at a similar height. 

The birds, having now thoroughly settled down, I search the 
heather well with the glasses over a wide space, and out of all that 
great number can only make out twenty-six. The glasses dis- 
cover a good many open pools and little canals of grass amongst 
the heather, but in none of these is a bird to be seen. They 
must therefore be right amongst the heather. Many of those I 
count are heads just protruding from it. Others are standing or 
sitting against the side of the tufts where it is rather thinner. A 
small naked patch or two may therefore be said to be occupied in 
this way, but where it gets more open there are no birds. I 
should think, indeed, that the birds generally sit close against 
the sides of the heather-clumps, and not right in the middle of 
them. ‘Those that I can see seem to be so situated. 

It must now be past eight, perhaps past nine, but there has 
been no flying backwards and forwards from one place to another, 
or circling about, as on yesterday. The birds have all remained 
where they went down, nor have any of those that were there 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 275 


when I came flown away. They are, indeed, wonderfully quiet 
this morning (compared, at least, with yesterday), hardly a bird 
running (none just now), but all sitting and sunning themselves ; 
for one rising and running, or rising merely, becomes at once 
visible. It is a fine sunny day, but was fine and sunny in the 
morning yesterday too. It is, however, I think, somewhat less 
cold. 

September 22nd.— Between 3 and 4 a.m. a violent storm was 
blowing, with, as I thought, rain, and I was anxious to see how 
this weather might affect the birds. At daylight, though not 
quite so rough, it was still blowing almost a gale. No rain was 
falling, nor do I think any had fallen. A west wind; the western 
part of the sky clear. I first went to my old watch-place on edge 
of amphitheatre, expecting to find the birds assembled there, as 
they had flown up yesterday from that direction ; but, on searching 
with the glasses, I could not discover any. (It was quite light, 
probably between 5.30 and 6, but had forgotten to look at clock 
before starting.) I then walked to same place as yesterday, and, 
sitting with my face turned towards where I had come from, 
waited for the birds, hoping to be able both to watch their flight 
up and mark their point of departure. I first noted, however, 
that some birds (possibly a good number, though I could only 
make out six or seven) were sitting in the heather on other side 
of bank, in same place as before. This long bank, for the most 
part covered with bracken, dividing the moor, and approaching 
in one place near a patch of open wood, gives fine opportunities 
for patient watching. I watched, however, in vain—no birds 
appeared; and, when I judged it to be about nine or later, 
I thought it no use to stay longer. It may perhaps be on 
account of the very strong stormy wind inclining them to lie 
close, for I do not suppose they had flown up before I came, so 
much earlier than on the two preceding mornings. 

As I am on the point of going five birds fly up, but on reaching 
bank they shear off, and fly right away instead of going down 
amongst the others; may possibly have seen me. They did not 
come from direction of the amphitheatre as on former occasions. 

In reflecting on the incident of the Hawk and Plover, as wit- 
nessed by me on morning of 20th, I begin to think I may have 
misinterpreted it—undervalued it, so to speak. At the time it 


276 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


did not seem to me either that the Hawk was much in earnest or 
the Plover much alarmed; nor could I observe that the birds ~ 
generally seemed particularly scared or excited. Reflecting now, 
however, that my attention was first called to it by a peculiar cry 
on the part of the Plover, which I had not heard before, and that 
the frequent utterance of this cry by the birds generally, their 
restlessness, frequent risings, circlings about, and flights back- 
wards and forwards from one place to another, all took place sub- 
sequent to the chase; and then, contrasting this conduct with 
their behaviour next morning (not rising again after they had 
once gone down), I am inclined to think that the one may be 
explained by their alarm at the Hawk, and the other represent 
their usual habits. 

September 23rd.—Must have got to the bank (same place as 
yesterday) about six. Sun just rising. Fine day. A fair 
amount of wind, but nothing compared to yesterday. Calm and 
still in comparison. Some birds in heather as before. Cannot 
tell how many, or whether any have flown up. After sitting and 
waiting a long time my attention was attracted by some cries of 
Herons in neighbouring copse, and I crept up the bank and 
listened, with the intention, if the Plovers should not come soon, 
of walking over and trying to get close enough for observation. 
At this moment, and whilst looking in opposite direction, a small 
flock of Plovers flew over me, and came down amongst those 
already in the heather. There were seventeen, and they flew quite 
silently. Vexed to have missed them again, I re-descended the 
bank, and had not been settled in position many minutes when a 
large number (evidently the main body) rose in a cloud into the 
air (as it seemed to me directly over the amphitheatre), and after 
circling a little, shining in the sun (their light under surface 
looking a beautiful soft silver), came straight down in my direc- 
tion. I concealed myself well amongst the bracken. They 
passed as before, but, as I had a little shifted my position, not 
so directly over me. They flew silently—I did not hear a single 
cry—and as soon as the last had passed me I crawled again to 
the edge of the bank, and was in time to see most of them come 
down in the heather amongst the others—a very pleasing sight. 
They alight with wings raised above the back, and little stilt-legs 
stretched down, slanting a little forward, and on touching the 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 277 


ground give (in most cases, I am not sure if in all) a little run 
forward. After the descent there was a good deal of running 
about, and very shortly another smaller flock flew up, doubtless 
from same place, though this I did not see. This last may have 
contained some twenty to thirty birds. The main body it was 
impossible to count; they were more together than before, not in 
the long straggling line that I had noted on 20th. After they 
had gone down I made haste to count them before they had 
become more concealed by the heather, and I made out one 
hundred and eight, some five or ten minutes later about seventy, 
and again, counting them after making these entries (com- 
mencing from about the Herons, and taking, I should say, a 
quarter of an hour), I could still make out fifty-four. They do 
not therefore appear to have concealed themselves quite so 
effectually as on 21st. There were no birds running about. As 
far as I can judge without a watch, it must have been about 
8 a.m. when the birds flewup. After the last batch of them had 
arrived I again heard, once, the whistling note I have described 
(*‘ tir-whi-whi-whi-whi-whi ”’), otherwise there was complete 


silence. 
(To be continued.) 


278 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


AVES. 


Occurrence of the Water-Pipit (Anthus spipoletta) in Sussex.— 
On Feb. 27th last I received for identification a Pipit from Mr. G. Bristow, 
of St. Leonards. The letter accompanying the specimen stated that it had 
been shot on Feb. 19th at Hollington, near St. Leonards, by a boy named 
Peacham. On comparing the bird with the descriptions in Dresser’s 
‘ Birds of Europe,’ I came to the conclusion that it must be a specimen of 
Anthus spipoletta. This identification was afterwards verified by Mr. 
Howard Saunders. ‘The bird was a hen by dissection.—N. F. Ticknursr 
(Winstowe, St. Leonards-on-Sea). 


Flycatcher feeding on Worms.—On May 12th I noticed a Flycatcher 
(Muscicapa atricapilla), which had only arrived that morning, feeding on 
worms. ‘The day was cold and wet, and probably flies were scarce, and the 
bird weary. Is this unusual? Ido not remember a similar case coming 
under my observation.—R. H. Ramssporuam (Meole Brace, Shrewsbury). 


Great Spotted Woodpecker (Dendrocopus major).— On Tuesday, 
May ldth last, about 7 p.m., I was in my garden on Greenhill, Evesham, 
and, hearirg the peculiar rattling noise attributed to these birds in common 
with the smaller Spotted Woodpecker, I followed the sound which pro- 
ceeded from the plantation adjoining the garden. I found it very difficult 
to determine the exact spot the noise came from; for one moment it 
appeared close at hand, and the next some considerable distance away. In 
the plantation there are a quantity of dead or dying beech trees, and, 
thinking it probable the noise proceeded from one of them about fifteen 
yards or more beyond me, I stood behind the trunk of a tree and waited. 
Fancying I saw a slight movement in a Scotch fir tree nearer to me than 
this beech tree, I watched carefully, and soon discovered a Woodpecker 
perching close against the trunk of the fir, its breast only being visible to 
me, its head and beak then being hidden by the trunk of the tree. All at 
once the bird began hammering with its beak at a dead branch which joined 
the'tree-trunk where it sat, and the strange ringing rattle was produced. 
With the aid of a powerful glass I was able to observe the action of the 
bird carefully, and found myself scarcely able to believe that such a sound 
could be thus made. The branch was sharply hit or pecked by the bird 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 279 


with the point of the beak, and its head was moved with extraordinary 
speed so that the action appeared almost continuous. I estimate the con- 
tinuation of each period of hammering at five or perhaps ten seconds, which 
was followed by a somewhat longer pause. The bird was of very brilliant 
plumage—evidently the male bird—and the noise had been repeated four 
or five times when it was joined by a second bird, evidently its mate. 
The pair then moved to another part of the tree, and to the leafy branches 
of a beech tree standing between me and the fir, and it was only at times 
that I could distinguish them before they flew away. My presence was 
quite unsuspected by them, and I am convinced that the rattling was the 
eall-note of the male bird, as it is said to be. Upon the meeting of the 
birds the noise was at once discontinued, and the only sound the birds made 
were soft twittering noises, as if speaking to one another. The branch 
used as a sounding-board was of considerable size, and at a height of about 
fifteen or twenty feet from the ground. The bird whilst hammering was 
almost sitting at the union of the tree and the branch in an upright position, 
and its beak was moved nearly horizontally, being very slightly inclined 
downwards. With the aid of the glass I clearly saw marks of the beak upon 
the bough.— Otiver H. New. 


Breeding of the Shoveler (Spatula clypeata) in Kent.—On May 3rd 
last I put up a pair of Shovelers from a piece of water in Romney Marsh; 
I got a good view of them through my glasses, and saw them a second time 
about half an hour later, when they flew back over my head. I searched 
the neighbouring rush, tufts, &c., but was unable to find any nest. On going 
back, however, to the same place on May 19th, I saw the hen bird swim- 
ming, followed by nine young ones a day or two old. The cock bird was 
not visible on this occasion. So far as I am aware, this is the first record 
of the Shoveler breeding in Kent. —N. F. Tickuursr (Winstowe, St. 
Leonards-on-Sea). 


Breeding of the Garganey (Querquedula circia) in Kent.—I have the 
pleasure of recording, I believe for the first time, the breeding of the 
Garganey in Kent. My brother found the nest on May 2nd in Romney 
Marsh. It was situated in quite a dry place in some long grass, and 
between thirty and forty yards from the nearest water. When first seen 
the nest consisted of only a few strands of dead grass, and contained one 
egs. On May 3rd there were two eggs, and a lot more grass-strands had 
been added to the nest, which was so well covered up and hidden that we 
had some difficulty in finding it again. On May 7th the nest contained 
six eggs, which were sparsely covered with down and a few grass-stems, the 
nest itself, owing to its increasing size, being much more easily seen than 
before. Subsequently, on May 12th, we found a second nest containing 


280 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


five eggs and the remains of a sixth, which had been broken probably by 
being trodden upon by a sheep. ‘The nest was deserted, the remaining eggs 
being glued to the nest by the contents of the sixth, the spaces between the 
eggs being occupied by a small growth of mildew. The amount of down in 
this nest was much less than that in the first, but still there was quite 
enough to surely identify the eggs by, the down being quite characteristic, 
and wholly unlike that of the Common Teal. I have suspected that this 
bird bred in Romney Marsh for some years, ever since having been told 
by a former resident there that a pair or two of Garganeys generally turned 
up at a certain spot about the 1st of Mav every year, but that so far 
as he knew they did not breed.—N. F. Tickaurst (Winstowe, St. Leonards- 
on-Sea). 


Little Crake in Shropshire.—A specimen of this rare bird (Porzana 
parva) was shot in November, 1898, by Mr. Tatton at Petton Park, seven 
miles north of Shrewsbury. It was lately recognized by my friend Mr. W. 
H. Hodges. Subsequently Mr. Tatton lent me the specimen, and I 
exhibited it at a meeting of the Caradoc Club. Mr. Howard Saunders has 
also seen it, and confirmed the identification. The occurrence is especially 
interesting since no authentic records are known, I believe, for any of the 
western counties north of Somerset.—H. E. Forrest (Shrewsbury). 


The Tameness of unmolested Birds.—In a letter received last month 
(May 10th) from my friend the Rev. A. F. Day, S.J., he gives me some 
graphic accounts of the confidence shown by wild birds to the inmates of 
St. Benno’s College, St. Asaph, N.W., where theology is the passion rather 
than zoology, and where skins and eggs are presumably not collected. He 
writes :—‘‘ Nearly all the Robins come freely on to the hand to take the 
food that is offered them; several will pick it out most dexterously from 
between the lips. The general accomplishment of cock Chaffinches is to 
catch fragments thrown up into the air, and one or two (at least) come on to 
the hand almost as confidently as the Robins; but now that nature’s pro- 
Vision is plentiful we more seldom succeed with them or the other occasional 
birds. The Hedge-Sparrows have lately taken to stepping on to one’s 
hands if lowered towards the ground, and it is with considerable assurance 
for such modest little creatures. The Coal-Tits have never been shy, but 
it was considered something of a triumph to get the Blue Tit to follow 
their example ; and now there is even one Ox-eye (Great Tit) that does 
likewise—him I had on my hand yesterday. Such are the main facts con- 
nected with the St. Benno’s natural aviary (I mean grounds). A short time 
ago I had a Coal-Tit firmly perched on my fingers for what seemed at least 
a minute, whilst excavating half an almond held between my thumb and 
forefinger. If you don’t believe above, come and verify it."—Ep. ; 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 281 


Ornithological Notes from Shetland.—A specimen of Buffon’s Skua 
(Stercorarius parasiticus) was obtained on May 24th, a male in full plumage, 
measuring from tip of beak to tip of central tail-feathers, 213 in.; the central 
tail-feathers were 114 in. in length. The stomach contained a few small 
beetles and some vegetable matter like tops of heather. I am not aware 
that the bird has ever been recorded as visiting Shetland. The Blackbird 
(Lurdus merula), usually described as merely a visitor to our isles, is now 
resident throughout the year, and has nested and brought out young for 
several years past. A pair built a nest in the honeysuckle which grows on 
the south wall of our house; four eggs were laid, but a marauding fiend of 
a cat upset all the domestic arrangements, and the birds have disappeared. 
I have been watching for some time past another nest built by a pair of 
Blackbirds in a loose stone wall close by the house, and to-day (May 26th) 
I was pleased to hear the chirping of young birds, and to see the old male 
carrying food to and fro. The season has been very bleak and cold; the 
leaves are only appearing on the trees now, and this, together with the 
desire to circumvent the odious cats, may have induced this particular pair 
of Blackbirds to abandon their usual habit of building in a shrub, and flee 
for security to a stone fortress. I am very much amused with a Starling 
which haunts this house; his power of imitating is excellent. I have 
heard him imitating perfectly the Blackbird, Hooded Crow, Corn Bunting, 
my police-whistle, and the neighing of a Horse.—T. Epmonpston SaxBy 
(Halligarth, Baltasound, Shetland, N.B.). 


AVICULTURAL NOTES. 

Hybrid Doves. — Homer Pigeon 3 xX Collared Turtle 2 .—-While in 
Manchester the other day I called upon Mr. Fred Muirhead, of Barnfield, 
Prestwich, to see his interesting little collection of living animals and birds, 
and more especially to examine a hybrid betwixt a cock Homer Pigeon and 
a hen Turtur risorius that I had heard of. It is a male, and was bred in 
1899. Its parents were not regularly paired, as it was the result of illicit 
intercourse, the male parent having already his own household located in 
the same aviary close beside the Turtle. In appearance the hybrid is of 
bolder carriage and smarter figure than a Turtle-Dove, while in colour it is 
all over of a much darker shade, wanting the dark collar, or any indication 
of it. The neck shows a beautiful vinous reflection similar to that of many 
dun or red-coloured Pigeons. Across the terminal third of the tail there is 
an indication of a dark bar. In size it is decidedly larger than the Turtle, 
slim and elegant in outline. The voice differs markedly from either the 
Pigeon or the Turtle, and appears to me, allowing of course for the lesser 
volume of sound, to be exceedingly similar to that of the Wood-Pigeon 
(Columba palumbus). The hybrid (only one bird of the mésalliance was 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., June, 1900. U 


282 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


reared) has been mated this season to a Turtle-Dove, but as yet the eggs 
have proved infertile. According to Count Salvadori (‘ Cat. of Birds,’ xxi. 
p. 414), 7. risorius is a domestic race of uncertain origin. It is not, 
however, probable that there is anything ‘“‘ composite ” about its pedigree. 
Long domesticity would seem to have developed some tendency to hybridity 
when opportunity offers. Some instances are noted (loc. cit.) with the 
Passenger Pigeon (Ectopistes migratorius), and with the male Fantail 
Pigeon, a whole series of specimens being obtained in the latter instance. 
Mr. Blagg has recorded (Zool. 1891, p. 113) a cross with 7’. communis, and 
Mr. W. Wiiliams has also described a similar case (Zool. 1894, p. 64). 

Domestic Pigeon X Columba enas.—Several years ago my friend Mr. 
James Blacklock, of Southwick, in my own neighbourhood, obtained eggs 
of the Stock-Dove from the ivy-covered sea-cliffs near his place, and had 
them hatched under Common Pigeons. The young Stock-Doves were 
reared successfully, and last year paired with Pigeons. Eggs were laid and 
successfully hatched, but all the hybrid young produced in successive 
broods have invariably died when a few days old. This present season the 
same thing has happened, and no hybrids have lived more than a week or 
so. I applied in the columns of a fanciers’ paper to see if any Pigeon 
rearer could suggest a remedy, but so far none has been suggested to obviate 
this aggravating result.—RoBurt SEervicE (Maxwelltown, Dumfries). 


PISCKES. 

The Pike and its Prey.—The voracity and cannibalism of this “ fresh- 
water Shark ” is so well known as to need no comment here, and the fact of | 
my present note may be superfluous for the readers of ‘ The Zoologist’; but 
until recently I had an idea, from my own small experience in the matter, 
and information from various anglers, that the Pike invariably swallowed its 
finny prey head foremost; if so, I have an exception which proves the rule. 
At the end of January a friend of mine caught a female Pike weighing 
18 lb., aud, on opening it, a fish of the same species was found in the 
stomach, weighing originally, I should suppose, from eight to ten ounces; | 
but the flesh of the tail portion of the body was partly digested, as it had | 
been swallowed tail first, which I supposed was somewhat remarkable, as in 
my limited experience I had not met with a fish in alike position in stomach | 
of either bird or fish, and I have dissected some numbers for the sake of | 
ascertaining their usual food. I can well understand that a comparatively | 
small fish once within the grip of such a tooth-arrayed and ponderous jawed | 
monster had a very remote chance of escape, whether taken head or tail | 
first; and I had been led to believe that if a fish was taken crosswise it was | 
worked in the jaws of its captor until the head of the victim pointed throat- | 
ward. Of course it is well known that the murderous pointed hooks ate | 
directed towards the head of the ‘ bait,” which seem to upset the theory of | 
head first—G. B. Corsin (Ringwood, Hants). | 


as 


( 283 ) 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


The Birds of South Africa. Vol.I. By Artuur C. Srarx, M.B. 
R. H. Porter. 


Tus volume introduces the series about to be published on 
the ‘Fauna of South Africa,’ edited by Mr. W. L. Sclater, the 
Director of the South African Museum, Cape Town, and possesses 
a melancholy interest by the fate of its author, who was killed at 
Ladysmith during the late siege. 

Ornithology is rapidly becoming—even if it is not already— 


- much less an esoteric science, to be followed only by students of 


means, who found it possible to acquire a charming but all too 
expensive a literature. We already possessed Sharpe's edition 
of Layard, and the excellent ‘Notes on the Birds of Damara 
Land,’ by Anderson, revised by Mr. J. H. Gurney; but these 
were practically the only handbooks on the South African sub- 
ject. There was a large literature, as may be seen by the 
bibliography given in this volume, but it pertained to the posses- 
sion of a specialist’s library; while the ponderous, expensive, 
and somewhat unreliable volumes of Le Vaillant were not only 
outside the reach of most, but represented an archaic form of the 
science. Consequently this book supplies a real want, as any 
traveller or collector in that now unsettled region will gratefully 
acknowledge. 

The classification pursued is very largely an eclectic one, 
based upon the proposed systems of Messrs. Sclater and Sharpe; 
the plan and arrangement followed is that of Mr. Oates in the 
volumes on ‘‘ Birds”’ in the ‘Fauna of British India,’ while a 
very welcome feature of the book is the quite unusual amount of 
information afforded under the heading “ Habits.” This subject 
should, and probably will, incite many observers to fresh efforts, 
for the bionomical story of the South African Birds is yet very 
largely to be told. Much has still also to be added to the distri- 
butional areas of the birds, Thus the so-called ‘‘ Mountain 


284 THE ZOOLOGIST, 


Canary” (Alario alario), stated to be confined to Cape Colony 
and Great Namaqua Land, is also a sometime visitant to the 
Transvaal, the writer of this notice having still a living speci- 
men of this constant songster which was captured more than six 
years ago near Pretoria. 

Much information is given as to the nidification of the species, 
which by the descriptions and descriptive “ keys” can be readily 
identified, though the volume only deals with about one-half of 
the Passerine Birds. We shall await the appearance of future 
volumes with the greatest interest, and the series will probably 
do the same for the fauna of South Africa as those edited by 
Mr. Blanford have done for the zoology of British India. 


Catalogue of the Arctiade (Noline, Lithosiane) in the Collection 
of the British Museum.. By Sir Grorecr F. Hampson, 
Bart. Published by the Trustees of the British Museum. 


WitTH commendable energy and promptitude Sir George 
Hampson has completed the second volume of his ‘‘ Lepidoptera 
Phalene,” the previous volume having been noticed in these 
pages last year (1899, p. 37). The present instalment contains 
589 pages, the critical arrangement and description of no fewer 
than 1217 species, and, in addition to over 400 uncoloured figures 
in the text, there is also issued in a supplementary form eighteen 
excellently coloured plates. 

When we estimate the amount of thorough work expended in 
this publication, based on the examination of nearly all available 
material, with its specific and generic revision, its keys to facili- 
tate identification, and its ample references to geographical dis- 
tribution, combined with the universality of its fauna, there can 
be little doubt we are receiving the most important entomological 
publication of the day. Of course views will, and must, differ on 
generic division; on specific differentiation probably the last 
word is Said in many cases, and naturalists, as a rule, as well as 
lepidopterists in particular, should welcome the healthy specific 
syithesis that obtains in these pages. 

We are inclined to appraise these works beyond the purely 
entomological standpoint. A directory may give the names and 
addresses of a population, but does not constitute the history of 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 285 


a people. If this is true of humanity, how equally certain is the 
application of the principle to other animals than man. The 
great conclusions that have been drawn from zoological studies— 
especially during the last fifty years—have been based on a 
nomenclature which has frequently misled and generally hampered 
the student who sought to philosophise on the teachings of 
specialists. According to one authority, a genus may be peculiar 
to an island; to another such a genus is considered as a synonym 
of one which ranges over more than a single continent. Some 
have actually been unable to treat a species as cosmopolitan, and 
have seized minute local characters for specific division; others 
have failed to see differences where such exist. It is thus 
evident that the right conclusions on z00-geography depend upon 
some finality in nomenclature. Such a monograph as the pre- 
sent—for it is more than a catalogue—is the type of publication 
which, while assisting the lepidopterist, will prove a boon to the 
much distracted naturalist. 


Descriptive Guide to the Collection of Corals on view at the South 
London Art Gallery, Camberwell, S.E. 


We have received this Descriptive Guide to the Collection of 
Corals on view at the South London Art Gallery, a collection 
lent for the purpose by Mr. John Morgan, of St. Leonards. We 
were quite surprised to find, instead of the usual type catalogue 
—as much at home with an exhibition of wax figures as a collec- 
tion of zoological objects—a most readable pamphlet on life- 
histories of the polyps themselves. ‘This small publication con- 
tains two good plates, some twenty-eight pages of printed matter, 
a reference to some “ popular works on Corals,” and is sold for 

onepenny. Withsuch a guide any person of average intelligence, 
_ though without a previous knowledge of the subject, can follow 
each specimen in the collection, and at the same time learn some 
of the mysteries of Coral existence. This is a very good move 
in a right direction. 


286 THE ZO0O0LOGIST. 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 


Norss on the mode of growth of Tubicinella trachealis, the Barnacle of 
the Southern Right Whale, have been contributed to the ‘ Transactions’ of 
the South African Philosophical Society (vol. xi. p. 1), by Dr. R. Marloth. 
The question had been raised by what means these parasites were able to 
penetrate into the epidermis of the Whale, seeing that their base was quite 
unarmed, their mouth being turned outwards towards the water. Dr. Mar- 
loth suspected that the Barnacle possibly secreted some fluid which possessed 
the power of dissolving the epidermis, and tested this theory by chemical 
experiment, which he details. This proved that a peptonising ferment 
diffuses through the basal membrane of the animal, and this fact explains 
its peculiar structure, as well as that of the skin of the Whale at the 
infested parts of its head. The young Tubicinella simply dissolves the 
epidermis with which it is in contact, absorbing the peptonisea liquid. As 
it continually grows at its lower end, it gradually descends in this way into 
the epidermis, the digesting of the epidermal layers taking plas at the 
same rate as the downward growth. 


In the last published Trans. Nat. Hist. Soc. of Glasgow (vol. v. n. ser. 
pt. i1.), Mr. R. Hedger Wallace has concluded his communication on 
** White Cattle; an Inquiry into their Origin and History,” the first part 
of which was referred to in our volume for 1899 (p. 41). The author in 
this instalment has dealt with the historical data relating to his subject, 
and has gathered considerable evidence pointing to the sacrificial customs 
connected with White Cattle, such as the erstwhile ‘ Oblations of the 
White Bull” at Bury St. Edmunds, and the autumnal sacrifices of cattle 
in South-western Brittany, where at the present day the sacritice takes the 
form of an auction, instead of the more ancient burning. Mr. Wallace con- 
cludes that this yearly custom in Brittany supports him in the views he has 
already expressed, “ that a study of the folk-lore of this country, coupled 
with a study of the ceremonials, festivals, and traditions of the church, will 
afford us a satisfactory explanation why White Cattle have been carefully 
preserved, so that we yet find them preserved in parks.” A most valuable 
and extensive bibliography relating to the subject is appended to this very 
thorough publication, 


—— ae $44. 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 287 


In the ‘ Contemporary Review’ for May, Mr. Matthias Dunn contributes 
an article on “ Mimicry and other Habits of Crabs.” The instances ad- 
duced as mimicry seem to fall under the terms “ Assimilative Colouration ” 
or “‘ Active Mimicry.” Of ‘“ Habits” there is quite a number of most 
interesting observations recorded. Of Cancer pagurus, the Great Crab, 
Mr. Dunn has been led to believe that the finest specimens exist between 
Dartmouth in Devon and the Lizard headland in Cornwall, where males 
are often known to reach thirteen and fourteen pounds weight, and where 
they are only called half-Crabs when under eight inches across the back ; 
whereas on most other parts of the British Isles Crabs two or three pounds 
weight and six or seven inches across the back are considered large. ‘The 
powers of smell and eyesight in this species are fairly good, and it prefers 
fresh red-coloured fish as food, such as the Red Gurnard, Red Mullets, and 
Bream, or the strongly perfumed flesh of the Whitehound Shark. Its 
enemies are all the large Skates existing on the coasts, with the Octopus 
vulgaris, and the Nursehound Sharks; while the Sea-Breams and Wrasse 
delight in feeding on the remains of their slaughter. The Skates hunt 
them with great energy, and with their tough snouts rout them out of the 
crevices of the rocks, and, after crushing them, devour them whole. Mr. 
Dunn has seen as many as five of these Crabs in the stomach of one Skate. 
The Octopus also feeds on them ravenously, and, but for their sharp nip- 
pers, would scarcely look for any other food. He has more than once seen 
such Cuttles with their arms bitten clean off, which no doubt was the 
result of battling with these Crabs. The Nursehound also feeds on the 
smaller forms. 


In the ‘ Cornhill Magazine’ for May, Mr. C. Parkinson writes on 
«The Great Birds of the Southern Seas.” The Albatross was well observed, 
and graphically described. On approaching Tristan da Cunha three or four 
species of Albatross had congregated round the ship, as many as thirty 
birds settling on the water astern in a manner highly satisfactory for close 
and continuous observation. After half a gale of wind a lull not infre- 
quently occurs, when the speed is reduced to two or three knots; then the 
hungry creatures literally clamour for food. Directly a bird intends to 
alight, the legs appear straddling downwards in ungainly fashion—a 
moment when even an Albatross looks Jike an ill-balanced Goose of un- 
wieldy size. For half a minute it runs along the surface of the waves, 
treading water, so to speak, until the enormous wings become manageable. 
Then the bird swims with both wings thrown back, like a pair of lateen 
sails—a very Argonaut on the translucent sea. At length the difficulty is 
overcome, the wings are packed away, and—like a large Gull—it rides the 
waves with consummate ease. Sometimes it paddles to and fro, or again 


288 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


it dives gracefully beneath the surface after Squids or similar ocean dainties. 
Half a dozen birds perhaps gravely assemble to inspect an empty beer- 
bottle thrown overboard to bob up and down idly upon the waves, and 
inquisitive bills peck vigorously at the unsatisfactory flotsam, until a battle- 
royal disperses the family party. The wiser ones meanwhile hover in mid- 
air, craning their necks to throw penetrating glances from a superior height. 

Of the Wandering Albatross (Diomedea exulans), the writer found eleven 
feet six inches to be the average wing measurement, although a gigantic speci- 
men in the Sydney Museum extends seventeen feet six inches, with a bill six 
inches long. At Randwick, near Sydney, he knew of one of the ‘‘ Molly- 
mauks ” having lived for fifteen years in a garden. It is a universal pet, a 
sort of monarch of the domain, and quite unabashed even at the presence of 
strangers. It will answer to call, possesses an imperturbable temper, and 
is geutleness itself with children. Although the “ thrice resounding waves ” 
for ever reverberate on the shore close at hand, the bird, strangely enough, 
never evinces the slightest desire to return to a seafaring life. Yet ona 
ship the captive refuses all food, and simply pines away; the heat of the 
tropics is said to be always fatal. 


Some records of heavy weights of fishes have lately been published, and 
it is desirable that these should be preserved. 

STURGEON (Acipenser sturio).—On May 30th, at the stores of Messrs. 
Spiers and Pond, Water Lane, London, a huge fish was exhibited, weighing 
614 lv., measuring from tip of tail to extremity of snout a little over 11 ft., 
with a girth of 5 ft. 6in. It was taken in the North Sea on May 28th. 
Another specimen from the North Sea was in the first week of May on view 
in the Pentonville Road. This fish weighed 525 1b., but its length was not 
ascertained. (R. B. L. in ‘ Field.’) 

SauLMon (Salmo salar).—One caught in the Severn of 51% lb., at the 
shop of Mr. Grove, Bond Street, on May 15th. 

Rep Mower (Mullus surmuletus).—A large specimen caught off Land’s 
End on May 18th. Weight, 3 lb. 3 oz.; length from nose to tail, 18 in. ;: 
girth, 12 in. (H.T. Welch, ‘Field.’) — 

Cape Saumon (Otolithus equidens).—A specimen caught at Algoa Bay 
by Dr. Bateman, weighing 65 lb., 61 in. in length, 32% in. in girth. Pre- 
served, and exhibited at a meeting of the British Sea Anglers’ Society, 
May 30th. 


Zoologist, 1900. Plate Ite 


SS 


West, Newman, photo. 
SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 


THE ZOOLOGIST 


No. 709.—July, 1900. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 
By H. Wauus Kew. 
(Puate ITI.) 


Tue production of a mucus-thread, as a means of progression 
through the air, has long been known in the Land-Slugs, and has 
been observed in seven genera, representing Limacide, Arionida, 
and Philomycide. 

The Spinning-Slug (Limaz filans) of authors is a myth, the 
habit being general, extending possibly to all Slugs of the families _ 
named. ‘The animals are occasionally seen descending from trees, 
fences, rafters in greenhouses, &c., and they are easily induced to 
descend from small exposed objects on which they may be placed. 
They crawl.from the object, and, when the tail parts company 
with it, the animal is sustained by a thread, which is left by the 
body at the tail, and is gradually lengthened. Sometimes the 


animal thus reaches a new support without a fall, but the faculty 


is imperfect, the animal often falling either without a thread or 
after making a short one. Large Slugs, when full-grown, are 
incapable of this kind of locomotion; but small ones, and the 
young of large kinds, are occasionally capable of making success- 
ful descents of surprising length. Threads measuring 3-7 ft. 
have several times been observed, and others 8-9 ft. long have 
been reported. 

On the foot of the descending animal wave-like appearances 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., July, 1400. x 


290 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


are observable; these are the result of muscular action identical 
with that giving rise to the creature’s ordinary locomotion; and 
we have here a clue to the nature of the progression through the 
air and of thethread. Whenever a Slug is in motion it discharges 
mucus, chiefly from the supra-pedal gland below the mouth; in 
ordinary locomotion it crawls over a film of this mucus which 
remains behind as a trail, and when in the air it crawls over 
a similar film, which collapses into a thread as the animal leaves 
it; this thread represents the trail in every respect, is derived in 
the same manner, and is in fact a continuation of it. Thethread 
is lengthened by the continued crawling action, combined with a 
constant discharge of mucus, and perhaps also by the weight of 
the animal, which appears to elongate the collapsing film. There is 
thus no special spinning-organ. The thread, however, is of extreme 
fineness, and is silky when dry; it generally springs up and floats 
(remaining attached at the point of origin) when the animal 
alights ; but it sometimes becomes attached to the new support, 
and is left, marking the animal’s aerial course. If the animal 
does not find a new support, or fall, it sometimes turns upon its 
thread, ascends it, and regains the former support ; it creeps up 
the thread as on a solid body, the slack (with other mucus 
emitted during the ascent) accumulating at the tail. It is chiefly 
when the creatures find themselves exposed to sunshine, dry 
atmosphere, or other dangers that they crawl from their sup- 
ports. One doubts, however, whether they derive much advan- 
tage from the use of the thread; there is no reason to suppose 
that they would often be injured if they dropped (as they often 
do by reason of the imperfection of their spinning). Falls of a 
few feet do not appear to be harmful; and the writer regards the 
Slug’s spinning as little more than an accidental circumstance 
resulting from the possession, for ordinary locomotion, of a con- 
tinuous supply of tenacious mucus. 

This faculty of making and using a thread, far from being 
confined to Land-Slugs, is found to extend not only to shell- 
bearing Pulmonata, but also to the remaining orders of Mollusca- 
Gastropoda—Opisthobranchiata, Pectinibranchiata, and Aspido- 
branchiata (with the possible exception of the last); and the 
writer’s principal object in the present paper is to bring together 
certain scattered information concerning the so-called spinning 


eo 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 291 


habits of these latter creatures—terrestrial, fresh-water; and 
marine univalves, and Sea-Slugs.* 


PULMONATA. 


In Pulmonata, other than Land-Slugs, spinning chiefly occurs 
among the air-breathing fresh-water Snails, in which it is pro- 
bably general. Among the Land-Snails of the order it appears 
to be very rare; the Helicide (typical Snails) are entirely un- 
represented, as also, with the exception of a single genus, are all 
the other groups with Helicoid shells. For Pupide we have two 
notes, but these, as it appears to the writer, are in need of con- 
firmation. With regard to the more or less Helicoid, semi-Slug- 
like Vitrina pellucida, one finds that Mr. Collinge several times 
tried, without success, to induce the creature to suspend itself ; + 
and a few trials by the writer with various land-shells (which were 
placed on twigs of needle-furze, &c.) were also unsuccessful, the 
animals gliding off and falling without a thread, or retiring into 
their shells and remaining on the twigs. In T'estacellide, I tried 
 Testacella scutulum ; in Vitrinide, Vitrina pellucida ; in Helicide, 
young Helix aspersa and nemoralis (or hortensis); in Pupide, 
Clausilia laminata and C. rolphit ; and in Stenogyride, Cochlicopa 
lubrica. 

ZonItTIpz. 


According to Andrew Garrett, the mucus of T’rochonanina 
conula,t and of other species of Trochonanina, is unusually 
tenacious, “‘and the animals possess the habit of ‘ thread-spin- 
ning’ to perfection’’; so much so, it is added, that it requires no 
small amount of patience, while gathering specimens, to detach 
them from the fingers, and secure them in the box or vial.§ 


* On the subject of the mucus-threads of Land-Slugs, I hope to give, in 
another place, details of observations and references; in addition to these 
molluscs, and to those now considered, the Mollusca-Pelecypoda (bivalves) 
are thread-makers and byssus-spinners, but I am unable at present to write 
of the habits of this class of Mollusca. For help in preparing the present 
paper, and in other tasks, Iam much indebted to the courteous and continued 
co-operation of my friend Mr. G. K. Gude. 

+ Collinge, Zool. (8), xiv. (1890), p. 468. 

{ Microcystis conula. 

§ Garrett, ‘ Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia’ 
(2), viii. (1881), pp. 383-4 ; ix. (1884), p. 21. 

x 2 


292 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


These little Snails, as far as the writer has ascertained, are the 

only Helicoid-shelled molluscs known to make threads; the 

Trochonanina conula was collected by Garrett from foliage of 

bushes in the Cook’s or Harvey Islands, and in the Society 

Islands. 
3 PupPiIpz&. 

There is a statement in Mr. Tye’s ‘‘ Molluscan Threads ” 
(1878) that Mr. Dixon, of Leeds, ‘‘ has seen several individuals 
of Clausilia rugosa var. dubia suspended.” * A number of Clau- 
silia rugosa kept by the presert writer for a considerable time in 
glass vessels, with twigs, &c., were not seen, however, to use a 
thread ; and, as indicated above, two other species of Clausilia 
have been experimented with on twigs of needle-furze with similar 
negative results. Clausilia rugosa, it is true, was sometimes 
seen hanging during rest by a point of dried mucus, attaching 
the lip of the shell to the object of support, and allowing the 
creature to swing freely; but this, apparently, was merely the 
result of the breaking away or failure of the greater part of the 
film by which resting Clausili@ ordinarily fix the mouth of the 
shell; a method of attachment familiar to us in the common 
Snails (Helix, &c.). In Helix (and probably in Clausilia also) 
the mucus of this attachment comes, not from the foot, but from 
the mantle. On inquiring of Mr. Dixon, in 1893, the writer 
found that the observation on Clausilia had passed from his 
memory ; he stated, however, that he had seen Balea perversa, in 
the Isle of Man, suspended by a string of mucus about an inch 
long from the under side of stone ledges; he supposed that the 
animals, in crawling over the ledges, had overbalanced, and that 
their mucus, more glutinous than usual owing to the dry weather 
prevailing at the time, had held them suspended, and had been 
gradually drawn out by the weight of the mollusc. 


LIMN2ID&. 

The air-breathing fresh-water Snails of this and the next 
family are notorious spinners, the habit being associated with 
the visits to the surface of the water which most of these 
creatures are compelled to make from time to time for the pur- 
poses of respiration. Most of them have light shells, and when 


_ * Tye, ‘Quarterly Journal of Conchology,’ i. (1878), p. 412. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 293 


the animal is extended, and the lung-sac filled with air, they 
differ from truly aquatic and truly terrestrial molluscs in being 
slightly lighter than the medium in which they live; when de- 
tached they generally rise to the surface, and from this position 
they appear to be unable to drop, except when they withdraw into 
their shells and expel air from the lung-sac. It thus happens 
that they usually spin upward instead of downward threads—a 
circumstance in which they differ, as far as the writer has ascer- 
tained, from all other molluscs. The process is probably 
identical with that seen in Limaz, but the thread, instead of 
preventing the animal’s fall, prevents its sudden rise to the 
surface. The animal, gradually raising the anterior part of its 
foot from the bottom on which it is travelling, crawls upwards 
through the water upon its slime, which, left behind in the form 
of a thread, retains the animal as it slowly ascends to the surface, 
to which, or to the slime-film now deposited there, the thread is 
fixed ; subsequently, crawling down the thread thus fixed, the 
creature uses it as a means of descent to its former position. 
Mr. Warington long ago published notes on this subject, but we 
are chiefly indebted for our information to Mr. Tye.* The 
latter naturalist kept most of the Limneids of this country in 
captivity for the purpose of observing their spinning. Some 
spun both when young and adult, others when young only; and, 
while some used their threads frequently, others did so rarely or 
not at all. The observer concludes, however, that all are more 
or less expert in this respect, and that ‘‘in the pellucid stillness 
of their own domain, when the eye of man is not present to pry 
into their daily avocations, this beautiful and delicate method of 
travelling is often used by them.” It is maintained by this 
author, and by Mr. Taylor,} that the creatures can spin downward 


as well as upward threads; and from the observations of these 


naturalists it certainly appears that when the air in the lung-sac 
is sufficiently exhausted, the animal is heavy enough, while yet 


* Warington, ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ (2), x. (1852), 
pp. 278-6; (2), xiv. (1854), p. 866; Zool. x. (1852), pp. 3634-5; xiii. (1855), 
p. 4533; Tye, Hardwicke’s ‘ Science-Gossip,’ 1874, pp. 49-52; ‘ Quarterly 
Journal of Conchology,’ i. (1878), pp. 401-15. 

+ Taylor, ‘Monograph of the Land and Freshwater Mollusca of the 
British Isles,’ i. (1899), pp. 318-9, 


294 THE ZOOLOGIST. 

extended from its shell, to descend through the water, making a 
thread as it goes, and to remain suspended in the water upon a 
thread thus made. This, however, it is believed, but rarely 
happens. Several of the observations quoted below, it is true, 
imply descent and suspension; but, as the thread is generally 
invisible, it is possible that the animals, in some cases, may have 
been descending, or resting, upon threads already spun and fixed 
during ascent. The animal’s ability to ascend or descend is 
attributed by Mr. Tye wholly to the condition of the lung-sac ; 
the creatures are lighter than water, he says, when the sac is in- 
flated, and heavier than water when the air of the sac is exhausted 
or expelled. It must be remarked, however, that it is when the 
air is exhausted that the creatures ordinarily require to ascend, 
and when the sac is fully inflated that they have to descend. It 
seems to the present writer that the changes in the creature’s 
specific gravity are largely contributed to by the contraction or 
extension of the animal itself into or from its shell; and it is 
probable that the creature, when sufficiently heavy to sink, is 
usually too much contracted and withdrawn to form a thread. It 
is interesting to note that Mr. Tye recognizes the fact that here, 
as in Limaz, the thread represents the mucus-trail of ordinary 
progression, such a trail, though usually invisible in the case of 
a Limneid, being always present in the track of the moving 
animal. On plants in vessels in which molluscs have been kept 
for a few days, Mr. Tye adds, a network of mucus stretches from 
leaf to leaf, and is readily apparent when fresh water is put in, 
the bubbles given off by the plants then adhering to the mucus- 
lines.* 


* The locomotory mucus, besides serving for ordinary crawling on solid 
bodies (when it is left behind as an attached trail), and for crawling through 
the water (when it is left in the form of a thread), serves also for a similar 
crawling progression at the surface of water, the animal, foot uppermost, now 
leaving the mucus in its path in the form of a floating trail. Limnezids and 
Physids are often seen thus crawling at the surface of the water of aquaria 
and of ponds; and the habit, which is common to many gastropods of all 
orders, was long a puzzle to naturalists. Alder and Hancock (1), however, 
who studied it in Nudibranchia (Sea-Slugs), saw the movements of the foot- 
sole to be those of ordinary crawling, and recognized the fact that the crea- 
ture’s progress was caused by these movements against the mucus which it 
emits and leaves in its track. The animal thus crawls along the floating 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 295 


Timnea.—“‘ In watching the movements of Limnee in the 
aquarium,” says Mr. Warington, “I was for some time under 
the impression that they had a power of swimming or sustaining 
themselves in the water, as they would rise from the bottom of 
the pond, a portion of the rock-work, or a leaf of the plants, and 
float for a considerable period, nearly out of their shells,” without 
any apparent attachment. On carefully watching this phenomenon, 
he found that the creatures “were attached by a thread or web, 
which was so transparent as to be altogether invisible, and which 
they could elongate in a similar way to the Spider; they also pos- 
sessed the power of returning upon this thread by gathering it up 
as it were, and thus drawing themselves back to the point which they 
had quitted.” The observer mentions a case in which a Limnea 
stagnalis, having reached the extremity of a leaf of Vallisneria, 


mucus, the authors maintain, just as it does on the attached mucus which it 
sheds on its path on a solid body. Willem (2), it may be added, evidently 
unacquainted with the work of Alder and Hancock, has confirmed their con- 
clusions from observations on Limnea and Planorbis :—‘ Les Gastéropodes 

' d’eau douce,”’ he says, ‘‘pour glisser renversés 4 la surface de eau, com- 
mencent par prendre appui sur la mince pellicule superficielle qui recouvre 
toujours l’eau des mares et des étangs; puis ils rampent a la face inférieure 
dun mince tapis de mucus que leur pied sécrete au fur et ad mesure de la 
progression. Cette locomotion,” the author adds, ‘‘ne différe de ]a locomo- 
tion sur les corps solides qu’en ce sens que, lors de la locomotion aquatique, 
le Mollusque est réduit a tirer parti de la rigidité de la seule trainée de 
mucine, tandis que, dans l’autre cas, la trainée est elle-méme collée 4 une 
surface solide.” By blowing lycopodium powder on the surface of the water, 
Willem clearly demonstrated the presence of the floating trail; the grains, 
gathering into groups on the rest of the surface, adhered evenly to the band 
of mucus, and showed it distinctly. Under natural conditions this floating 
trail is usually invisible, but not invariably. We find, for instance, that 
Mr. Crowther (3), passing along a disused canal connecting bends of the 
Calder, distinctly saw the tracks of Limnea stagnalis at the surface of the 
clear water, in the sunshine, with a darkened background of black mud; they 
appeared as whitish iridescent paths of mucus, 6-8 ft. long, and half an inch 
wide, mostly straight, and often crossing one another nearly at right angles. 
(1) Alder and Hancock, ‘ Monograph of the British Nudibranchiate Mollusca,’ 
1845-55, pp. 20-1; (2) Willem, “ Note sur le procédé employé par les Gas- 
téropodes d’eau douce pour glisser 4 la surface du liquide,” ‘ Bulletins de 
VAcadémie Royale des Sciences, des Lettres et des Beaux-Arts de Belgique’ 
(3), xv. (1888), pp. 421-30; (8) Crowther, ‘‘ Mucous Tracks of Limnea 
stagnalis,” ‘ Journal of Conchology,’ viii. (1896), p. 230; and seelalso Taylor, 
tom, cit. p. 316, fig. 607, 


296 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


launched itself off from it; and, after moving about with a sort 
of swimming or rolling motion in a horizontal direction for some 
time, lowered itself gradually. During the descent, the flexible 
leaf was bent with an undulating motion, corresponding with 
every movement of the Snail, and making it clear that the 
animal had an attachment to the extremity of the leaf. Proof 
of the existence of a thread was obtained also by means of an 
experiment which the observer often repeated with Limnea 
stagnalis, L. auricularia, and Amphipeplea glutinosa.* When 
the Snails were some inches from the supposed point of attach- 
ment, a rod was introduced, and slowly drawn on one side in a 
horizontal direction; and, by this means, the Snails were made 
to undulate to and fro, obeying exactly the movement of the rod. 
This had to be done gently, for when too much force was used 
the thread broke, and the animal rose rapidly to the surface. 
According to Mr. Tye’s observations, Limnea glabra spins its 
upward thread well and easily; ZL. stagnalis, when young, does 
the same, but the habit decreases as the animal grows older; 
the same is the case with L. palustris, which, however, was 
not seen to use a thread as often as L. stagnalis. L. auricularia, 
L. truncatula, and L. peregra, though kept under observation by 
Mr. Tye, were not seen by him to spin. Mr. R. M. Lloyd, how- 
ever, had observed the habit in the last-named species. ‘The 
present writer has noted L. peregra and L. palustris, presumably 
retained by threads, slowly rise through the water in aquaria; 
the L. peregra, which was extended as if crawling on a solid 
body, did not always keep its foot in the same plane, from which © 
fact the writer concludes that it was not creeping up a thread 
already fixed. The water through which it rose was about eight 
inches deep; and, on arriving at its destination, the animal 
applied its foot to the surface-film of the water, under which it 
crept in the usual inverted position. In Z. auricularia, the use of 
a thread was observed, as we have just seen, by Mr. Warington. 
Mr. Taylor, also, has seen this species spin, and has recently 
published a figure of an individual using a thread. This figure 
(Fig. 1) shows the animal, moderately extended from its shell, 
suspended from the surface of the water upon a downward-spun 
thread. ‘The drawing was at first supposed by the writer to be 


* Liumnea glutinosa. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. ; 297 


inaccurate; but Mr. Taylor, replying to an enquiry, states that 
it represents an observation made in his aquarium in 1889; and 
assures me that he has several times witnessed the formation, by 
Limneids, of short downward threads. 

Amphipeplea.—The use of a thread by Amphipeplea glutinosa* 
has been observed, as already noted, by Mr. Warington. One in- 
dividual was seen to gradually rise, from a piece of rock in the 
aquarium, to a distance of three to four inches; it then stayed 
its progress, and soon afterwards rose suddenly and rapidly to 
the surface, the retaining thread having evidently given way. 
Professor Tate has remarked that the water in which this 
animal is kept, if shallow and insufficient, “is soon rendered 
glutinous with their mucus-threads”’;+ and Mr. F. W. Fierke, 
who kept specimens in a jar, mentions threads of mucus “ con- 
necting weed to weed, and sometimes even decorating the shells 
of other molluscs with which L. glutinosa had evidently come in 
contact’; he mentions, also, having observed the animal gently 
rise through the water.{ 

Planorbis.—In the flattened Limneids of this genus (coil- 
shells), we are again indebted, for the first observation, to Mr. 
Warington, who appears to have seen the habit in several 
species. Mr. Tye saw it—less frequently than in Limnea—in 
Planorbis spirorbis, P. carinatus, P. complanatus, and P. contortus, 
but not in six other species kept under observation. In P. com- 
planatus the habit has been noted, also, by Mr. Musson.§ 

Segmentina.—Segmentina lineata || was kept by Mr. Tye, but 
was not seen to spin. We have a statement by Professor 
Cockerell, however, that one of his brothers, who had been 
keeping specimens in a bell-jar, had seen one “spinning a 
downward thread” from the surface of the water to the bottom 
of the bell-jar. 4] 

Ancylus: aberrant Limneids (fresh-water Limpets).—Mr. 
Clark, long ago, saw that Ancylus fluviatilis living on pebbles in 

* TLimnea glutinosa. 

+ Tate, ‘Land and Fresh-water Mullusks of Great Britain,’ 1866, p. 198. 

| Fierke, ‘ Journal of Conchology,’ vi. (1890), p. 253. 

§ Musson, ‘Land and Fresh-water Shells of Nottinghamshire,’ 1886, MS. 

|| Planorbis lineatus. 


{1 Cockerell, ‘‘ Segmentina lineata, Walker, a Thread-spinner,” ‘ Zoolo- 
gist’ (3), ix. (1885), p. 267, 


298 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


brooks with a rapid current, must find it difficult to visit the 
surface to breathe, unless, as he suggests, it has the power “ of 
veering out a filamentary cable,” by which it can return to its 
original site.* It is probable, however, that the species of Ancylus 
are not bound, like the majority of Limneids, to visit the sur- 
face; and, in all probability, they do not spin upward threads. 
For Ancylus lacustris we have a note by Mr. Taylor :— 


‘My valued correspondent, Mr. T. D. A. Cockerell, has communicated 
to me the interesting circumstance that this species has the power 
possessed by many other Lymneaide of spinning a mucus-thread. He 
says: ‘I have just been watching a young specimen of Ancylus lacustris 
spinning a downward thread.’ According to the rough but characteristic 
sketch of the circumstance made by Mr. Cockerell, the thread was about 
half an inch long, attacbed to the extremity of a leaf of the Anacharis, the 
body of the animal being bent during the operation, the head and tail nearly 
close together.” + 


The sketch referred to was not published by Mr. Taylor; but 
the writer is permitted to give a copy of it (Fig.2). The animal 
appears to be the only molluse with a Limpet-like shell known 
to produce a thread. 


Puysip#. 


The air-breathing freshwater Snails of this family resemble 
Inmneide in habits; but they possess greater activity, and make 
a more general use of threads. Montagu (1803) states that 
Physa fontinalis t ‘‘ will sometimes Jet itself down gradually by a 
thread affixed to the surface of the water, in the manner of the 
Inmazx filans from the branch of a tree.”’*§ Here, however, as in 
some other cases, the animals observed were possibly descending 
threads already fixed; for Physids, like Limneids, are ordinarily 
slightly lighter than water; and they spin their threads generally, 
if not invariably, during ascent. The habit was noticed also in 
Physa fontinalis by Mr. Warington, who states that on one occasion 
introducing a rod between the creature and its point of attach- 
ment, he moved it out of its straight course a considerable 


* Clark, ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ (2), xv. (1855), 
p. 285. 
+ Taylor, ‘‘ Ancylus lacustris, a thread-spinner,” ‘Journal of Concho- 
logy,’ iv. (1883), p. 127. 
| Bulla fontinalis, § Montagu, ‘ Testacea Britannica,’ 1803, p. 227, 
\ 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 299 


‘distance; and, by then slowly drawing the rod upwards, he 

& succeeded in raising the Snail out of the water, a space of about 
_ seven inches, suspended by its thread, which, though difficult to 

see in the water, now became distinctly visible. Mr. Tye chiefly 
observed Physa hypnorum ; he states, however, that P. fontinalis 

uses its thread in a similar way, though less frequently. According 
_ to this observer, the young, as soon as they issue from the egg, 
are capable of spinning a thread and rising to the surface of the 
mewater :— 


§ “If my readers wish to see for themselves this habit of travelling, as 

used by the mollusca, let them take a few adult Physa hypnorum .. . 
_ place them in a glass vessel with some small pebbles at the bottom and a 
- little weed ... and keep them until they deposit spawn. As soon as the 
_ young are free from the spawn mass they will commence spinning, and 
practise it so often that the process may be seen at any time.” 


All the threads observed were spun upwards during ascent to 
the surface; the longest were the work of P. hypnorum, and 
were spun in a vessel in which the water was fourteen inches 
deep; they extended from the bottom to the surface. When a 
P. hypnorum, spinning its upward thread, was much disturbed, 
it was seen to abandon the idea of reaching the surface, and to 

turn and descend the unfinished thread, altering its position, 
Mr. Tye says, with much dexterity and ease by bringing its 
extremities together, and changing the point of attachment of 
the thread from the tail to the head. ‘This is certainly a curious 
performance; but, allowing for the reversed condition of specific 
gravity, it will be noted that it exactly corresponds with the 
turning and ascent of a thread by Limaz ; the buoyancy of Physa, 
of course, keeps the thread taut, just as does the weight of Limaz. 
When the animal completes its thread, it attaches it at the 
surface of the water, a minute concavity at the upper end acting, 
according to Mr. Tye’s description, like a small boat, of air, and 
sustaining the thread; but it is more correct to say, perhaps, 
that the thread is continued at the surface in the form of a 
floating slime-trail, and that, thus anchored, it slightly cups the 
water’s surface-film. When the Physa returns from the surface 
by descending its thread, Mr. Tye further observes: the thread— 
not invariably gathered up and carried back—sometimes remains 
attached to the surface; and in that case, it may be used, both 


300 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


for ascent and descent, as a more or less permanent ladder; it 
is strengthened by an additional trail of mucus each time a 
molluse passes over it, and thus it becomes somewhat strong and 
lasts for a considerable time. Mr. Tye had young P. hypnorum 
crawling up and down fixed threads of this kind for eighteen 
to twenty days together; and on one occasion he noted three 
individuals, and a Limnea glabra, upon a Physa’s thread at the 
same time :— 


“Often, when two Phys@ meet upon the same thread, they fight as only 
molluscs of this genus can, and the manceuvres they go through upon their 
fairy ladders outdo the cleverest human gymnast that ever performed. I 
once saw one ascending, and when it was half-way up the thread it was 
overtaken by another; then came the ‘tug of war’; each tried to shake 
the other off by repeated blows and jerks of its sheli, at the same time 
creeping over each other's shell and body in the most excited manner. 
Neither being able to gain the mastery, one began to descend, followed by 
the other, which overtook it, reaching the bottom first. Yet they are not 
always bent upon war, but pass and repass each other in an amicable spirit. 
One of the most beautiful sights in the molluscan economy is to see these 
little ‘golden pippins’ gliding through the water by no visible means; 
and when they fight, to see them twist and twirl, performing such quick 
and curious evolutions, while seemingly floating in mid-water, is astonish- 
ing, even to the patient student of Nature’s wonders.” 


This use of threads as more or less permanent ladders is 
unique, as far as the writer knows, among all the mollusca. 
Mr. W. Jeffery, who kept Physa hypnorum in an aquarium, has 
referred to the creature’s habit of spinning a thread while rising 
perpendicularly to the surface; he notes that after taking in a 
supply of air it may turn leisurely about and crawl down the 
same thread; and mentions that once, while the animal was thus 
returning, the thread parted from its mooring, ‘‘when poor 
hypnorum was quickly carried to the surface again by the air it 
had taken in.”* Mr. Musson, further, mentions having observed 
spinning both by P. hypnorum and P. fontinalist; and Mr. 
Standen, who refers to P. fontinalis, has obligingly informed the 
writer of observations made by him. The last-named naturalist 
remarks particularly upon the junction of the thread with the 


* Jeffery, ‘Journal of Conchology,’ iii. (1882), pp. 310-1. 
+ Musson, l. ¢, 


a 


2st 
re 


at Wed 


* 


} 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 301 


surface of the water, stating that the point of attachment is 
_ plainly visible, especially when the sun’s rays fall upon the water 


of the tank in which the animals are kept; he compares the 


cupping of the surface-film (which can be conveniently examined 
with a lens) to a small inverted parachute, and states that it is 
shown to perfection when affected by the jerking motions of an 
ascending Snail. The accompanying diagram, based upon the 
observations here stated for Physa, will serve, in a general way, 
to illustrate the use of threads by aquatic Pulmonates. (Fig. 3.) 


OPISTHOBRANCHIATA. 


Suborders Tectibranchiata and Nudibranchiata (Sea-Slugs). 
_ Of Tectibranchs, only one family—Philintde—is here represented ; 
and that only by the following note by Mr. Spence Bate :— 

“‘ The fact, observed by Mr. Warington, of the power of the Limneus 
to move from one place to another by means of a mucous suspending cord, I 
have observed also to be the case with Bulla aperta [{ Philine aperta] in the 
vivarium of my friend Mr. Smyth; but the power of secreting the mucus, 
which is exuded from the external surface of the animal, is limited in its 
continuance; to prove the fact, we raised it three times to a glass shelf in 
the vivarium ; the last time, not being able to secrete the ladder, it fell 
head over heels, and therefore lost the power of choosing its place below, 
as it could do when it came down by the cord.” * 

In the Nudibranchs (typical Sea-Slugs) the production of a 
thread has been noted in at least four families, and is perhaps 
general. As the creatures are not ordinarily lighter than water, 
they do not spin upward threads; lke Limaz, like the Philine 
just noted, and, like most other gastropods, they produce their 
mucus-lines during descent. While crawling at the surface of 
water, Alder and Hancock state :—‘‘ The Nudibranchs occasionally 

drop suddenly down, suspending themselves from the surface by 
a thread of mucus, which is fixed to the tail or posterior extremity 
of the foot. In this way they will let themselves gradually down 
to the bottom, or remain some time pendent in the water without 
apparent support; for the thread of mucus 1s so transparent that 
it can scarcely be seen. When carefully looked for, however, it 
can always be perceived, originating in the track of mucus left on 
the surface by the animal, the mucus forming a small inverted 


* Bate, ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ (2), xv. (1855), p. 131. 


302 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


cone at the point from which the thread issues, and here slightly — 
dimpling the surface of the water.”* It appears, from an 
observation by Gray on Elysia, that the suspensory thread can 
be subsequently ascended by the animal. 


PoLYCERIDZ. 


Thompson states that three Sea-Slugs believed to pertain to 
Polycera quadrilineata,t kept in a phial of sea-water, were gener- 
ally seen suspended by their threads from the surface, the body 
at the same time moving freely about with much grace.{ Polycera 
lessonit, Alder and Hancock mention, may be seen, in captivity, 
for hours together, ‘“‘ suspended by a film of mucous matter from 
the surface of the water.” 

Doripip&. 


Chromodoris amabilis} (Ceylon), according to Kelaart, some- 
times creeps at the surface, and ‘‘ when touched with a feather it 
adheres by its foot, and can be kept dangling in this position by 
the aid of the mucous thread secreted by the surface of the foot.”’|| 


EOLIDID. 


Mr. Sinel mentions having frequently observed Holis hanging 
by a thread from the water-surface, the suspended animal having 
the body doubled up, Hedgehog-like, with the back downwards.{] 
The writer learns from Mr. Hornell that the animal thus referred 
to by his colleague is Facelina coronata.** The thread, Mr. 
Hornell states,t} is sometimes 4-5 in. in length. 


ELYSIIpDa. 
Elysia viridis,tt from Swanage Bay, kept by Gray in a vase, 
usually rested, attached by the tail to the glass, with the body 


* Alder and Hancock, op. cit. p. 21. 
| P. quadrilineata v. nonlineata. 
} Thompson, ‘ Annals of Natural History,’ v. (1840), p. 92. 
§ Doris amabilis. 
| Kelaart, ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ (8), iii. (1859), 
pp. 294-5. 
{I Sinel, ‘Journal of Marine Zoology,’ i. (1894), p. 82. 
*k Holis coronata. 
tt Hornell, ‘Journal of Marine Zoology,’ ii. (1896), p. 59. 
{i Aplysiopterus viridis. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 303 


- freely extended into the water, and the mantle-edges expanded ; 
_ when the vase was moved or otherwise shaken, the animal con- 
tracted the mantle over its back, and descended ‘“‘ head foremost, 
as it were dropping down to the bottom, leaving a mucous fila- 
_ ment attached to the glass”; subsequently, Gray adds, it ascended 
by the filament, rising thus towards the surface, and becoming 
attached to the glass as before.* 


LIMAPONTIIDZ. 


A supposed planarian-worm, Planaria variegata—probably a 

_ Limapontiat—was observed by Dalyell to be liable, in crawling 

up the side of a vessel, to drop to the bottom, its descent being 
apparently retarded, the observer says, by an invisible thread.} 


ASPIDOBRANCHIATA. 


In the whole of the Aspidobranchiata we have but a single 
observation, and this, it is said, requires confirmation. It is not 
“surprising that no case of spinning occurs among the Limpet and 
Limpet-like families; but the absence of records for the land 
operculates of the order—-Helicina, &c.—is less easy to under- 
stand, especially in view of the fact that several of the land 
operculates regarded as Pectinibranchiata are known to suspend 
themselves. ‘The Aspidobranch said to be a spinner is our little 
fresh-water nerite (Neritina fluviatilis), whose name appears in 
this capacity in most of the books; its only claim to notoriety in 
this respect, however, rests upon the fact that it was listed by 
Mr. Warington (with several air-breathing Water-Snails) as 
having been observed by him to spin.§ No particulars are 
given, and it is supposed by Mr. Tye that the observer may 
have been mistaken. || 


* Gray, ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ (8), iv. (1859), 
pp. 239-40. 

+ Johnston, ‘Catalogue of the British Non-parasitical Worms in the 
British Museum,’ 1865, p. 12. 

| Dalyell, ‘The Powers of the Creator displayed in the Creation,’ ii. 
(1853), pp. 115-6. 

§ Warington, 1854, l.c. 

|| Tye, 1874, 2. c.; 1878, l. c. 


304 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


PECTINIBRANCHIATA. 


In Pectinibranchiata the spinners occur chiefly among the 
mainly phytophagous kinds, which live on seaweed growing near 
the shore or floating on the surface of the ocean, on aquatic 
plants in brackish and fresh water, and on branches and aerial 
roots of trees, bushes, &c., by the water’s edge and on land; we 
have also a few notes for kinds living on rocks, coral, &c.; as 
well as for others whose habitats afford less facilities for the 
exercise of the faculty. Among the notoriously carnivorous © 
Sea-Snails, Whelks, Murices, Purples, &c., we have no observa- 
tions; nor have we any for the Volutes, Olives, Harps, Cones, ° 
&c.; among the Mitres, we have one known spinner; and among 
the Cowries, one. Some of these animals are of large size, but 
nearly all those with which we are concerned are small, or of 
moderate growth. ‘These creatures, like other spinning molluscs 
(except air-breathing Water-Snails), are generally heavier than 
the medium in which they live, and thus they spin during 
descent ; the threads in many cases are doubtless used for pur- 
poses of locomotion; in other cases, however, their chief function 
seems to be the retention of animals lable to be shaken from 
their supports during high waves and winds; in still other cases 
the threads appear to serve chiefly as means of attachment and 
suspension during repose, the creatures being upheld at this 
time sometimes by one and sometimes by several or many threads. 
Most spinning Pectinibranchs, no doubt, are able to ascend to 
their former positions by crawling up the suspensory thread ; 
this has been observed in Litiopa, in Valvata, and perhaps in 
Rissoa. 

In the molluscs above considered—air-breathing Water-Snails 
and Sea-Slugs—the threads are doubtless of the nature of those 
of Limax, being derived from anterior glands, and representing 
the mucus-trail of ordinary locomotion. The same is probably 
the case with some of the spinners of the present order; but the 
writer is doubtful on this point, for the foot in Pectinibranchs, 
often of peculiar construction, serves for locomotion, differing 
somewhat from that with which we are familiar in other gastro- 
pods. In some cases figures of the foot show conspicuously the 
long transverse slit-like opening of an anterior pedal gland, 


' 
? 
_ 
yy 
. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 305 


whence the mucus of the thread might presumably be derived. 
In many Pectinibranchs, however, in addition to the anterior 
gland, a ventral pedal pore exists in the median line of the 
anterior half of the foot-sole ; it forms the opening of a cavity 
said to be comparable to the byssal-cavity of bivalves, and from 


' it, externally, a well-marked groove often runs to the tip of the 


tail. It can hardly be doubted that the threads, in many Pecti- 
nibranchs, are derived from this ventral pore; in Cerithiopsis 
tubercularis, for instance, Jeffreys appears to have clearly seen 
the thread issue from “‘the opening in the centre of the foot- 
sole’’; a narrow but deep groove extends from this opening to 
the tail, and Jeffreys tells us that it is by the tip of the tail that 


this animal attaches its thread to an object of support. 


CYCLOPHORIDE. 
In Borneo, the writer was informed by Mr. Everett, certain 


land-operculates of this family, species of Alyceus, have the habit 


of suspending themselves, by a single thread, beneath over- 
hanging ledges of the limestone rocks on which they abound. 
Mr. Everett often saw numbers hanging in this way, during rest, 
by threads which, to the best of his recollection, were sometimes 
an inch long; the habit, he adds, may “save them from the 
attacks of such foes as, for instance, Land-planarians, which are 
most frequently to be found in the same situations as these 
Mollusca, and which I have observed to prey on small Helices, 
which, however, have not the protecting operculum of the 
Alycei.” That molluscs thus escape certain enemies seems 
highly probable, and it is perhaps « mistake to suppose that 
operculates are already sufficiently protected; for Lucas, in 
Algeria, observed that numbers of Cyclostoma voltzianum, in spite 


of the operculum, are destroyed by the larve of a Drilus.* 


According to Swainson, ‘‘ Megalomastoma suspensum, Guild- 
ing,” is often found suspended by glutinous threads; and the 
remark is illustrated by a woodcut showing a shell of considerable 
size hanging from a twig by threads of moderate length, thirteen 
to fourteen in number, arranged upon the twig in four groups, 
but all proceeding from one point from between the operculum 

-* Petit de la Saussaye (quoting Lucas), ‘Journal de Conchyliologie’ iii. 
(1852), p. 100. 

Zool, 4th ser. vol. IV., July, 1900. Y 


306 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


and the outer lip of the shell. (Fig. 4.)* From the fact that 
Guilding lived at St. Vincent, the creature is probably West 
Indian; but unfortunately no description of it has been pub- 
lished, and its identity cannot be ascertained. The information 
and figure were probably derived from Guilding’s unpublished 
papers, of which Swainson is known to have made use. ‘The 
figure, perhaps worked up from a rough sketch not intended for 
publication, is probably inaccurate, and much enlarged ; it does 
not appear to represent Megalomastoma antillarum, Sowerby, or 
M. guildingianum, Pfeiffer, to which names ‘‘ Megalomastoma 
suspensum’’ has been referred; and Mr. EK. A. Smith (British 
Museum), who has obligingly considered the figure for the 
writer, thinks that it represents, possibly, Cistula lineolata, a 
small West Indian shell, of which the Museum acquired un- 
named specimens at the sale of Guilding’s collection. If this be 
the case, of course, our spinner belongs not to the present, but 
to the following family. 


CYCLOSTOMATID. 


In some notes forwarded to ‘Loudon’s Magazine’ in 18381, 
Guilding mentions a ‘“ Cyclostoma” common in the Virgin 
Islands, which, having given out a mucous thread, closes the 
operculum, and swings by the thread when hardened by the air, 
safe from ants and other enemies.t| This note was received in 
the year preceding that of Guilding’s death, and, as he does not 
mention any other thread-making operculate, the writer presumes 
that this “ Cyclostoma” is identical with the “ Megalomastoma 
suspensum.’ In this case, in the circumstances just mentioned, 
the creature is possibly a Cistula; and we find it stated by Mr. 
R. J. L. Guppy that Cistula aripensis { (Trinidad) frequently 
suspends itself by two or three glutinous threads from branches, 
or from the under surface of leaves.§ Mr. Guppy, replying to an 
enquiry, has had the kindness to inform the writer that this little 
shell, $3-$ in. long, is the only mollusc known to him in Trinidad 


* Swainson, ‘Treatise on Malacology,’ 1840, p. 186. 

+ Guilding, ‘ Loudon’s Magazine of Natural History,’ ix. (1886), p. 195. 

} Adamstella aripensis. 

§ Guppy, ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ (3), xvii. (1866), 
p. 45; ‘Proceedings of the Scientific Association of Trinidad,’ i. (1866), 
p. 31. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 307 


_ to hang suspended, and that the threads are sometimes of con- 
- siderable length. Chondropoma dentatum* (Key West), a shell 
about half an inch long, is stated by Binney to spin a short 
_ thread, and hang suspended by it during rest; and at the end of 
one of his chapters the author gives a small woodcut, which, 
though not described, evidently represents this shell, slightly 
_ enlarged, hanging by ashort thread from a leaf-stalk; the thread, 
according to the drawing, proceeds from between the operculum 
and the outer lip of the shell, considerably nearer to the umbilicus 
than to the suture. (Fig. 5.)t 

Another species, Chondropoma plicatulum, a little larger than 
the last, was obtained by Dr. J. S. Gibbons, at Puerto Cabello, 
hanging suspended during repose by a thread 4-3 in. long, very 
thin, but strong, flexible, and silk-like; the thread issued from 
between the operculum and the outer lip, two-thirds of the 
latter’s length from the suture, a position similar to that shown 
in Binney’s drawing.{ Similar suspension was observed by 
Dr. Gibbons also in the allied Tudora megacheila. Near St. 
Ann’s, Curagao, on a waste piece of ground which appears to 
have been a kind of conchologist’s paradise, he found this 
creature in great abundance, ‘‘ suspended by its silk-like thread 
from Acacia boughs, or strewed thickly along the ground under- 
neath”; the thread resembled that of Chondropoma plicatulum, 
but was shorter.§ 

Among Old-World Cyclostomas, we have a note relating to 
Cyclostoma articulatum, a shell of considerable size, belonging to 
Rodriguez (Mascarene Islands) :—‘‘ When it retired and closed 
its shell,’ says Woodward of a specimen kept under a bell-glass, 
“it still adhered, and sometimes became suspended, by a 


* Cyclostoma dentatum. 

+ Binney, ‘ Terrestrial Air-breathing Mollusks of the United States,’ ii. 
(1851), pp. 347-9; and see also W. G. Binney, ‘ Land and Freshwater Shells 
of North America,’ 1865, pp. 96-7, fig. 194 (Smithsonian Miscellaneous Col- 
lections, vii.) ; and Tryon, ‘American Journal of Conchology,’ iv. (1868), 
p. 11; pl. xviii. fig. 15. 

t Gibbons, ‘ Journal of Conchology.’ ii. (1879), p. 184; and in Tye, 
‘Quarterly Journal of Conchology,’ i. (1878), p. 412. 

§ Gibbons, ‘ Quarterly Journal of Conchology,’ i. (1878), pp. 411-2; and 
Tye, l.c. 


Sy y2 


308 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


tenacious thread of mucus.” * It would have been interesting 
to have had more particulars of this attachment, for, according 
to Dr. Gibbons, the South African Cyclostomas fix their shells 
by a brittle pellicle of dried mucus, proceeding from the edge of 
the columellar lip, a mode of attachment, as he states, wholly 
different from that of Chondropoma and Tudora, whose flexible 
silk-like thread, as just mentioned, passes between the outer lip 
and the operculum.t 


LITYoRINIDZ. 


Gray has listed Littorina with Pectinibranchs capable of 
making threads,} but the writer does not know on what authority. 
For repose, out of the water, most of these Periwinkles closely 
fix their shell by a pellicle of dry mucus, compared by Gibbons 
to that of the Old-World Cyclostomas, and by Jeffreys and others 
to the attaching film of Helix.§ Of Lacuna, however, which 
belongs to this family, Jeffreys states that the creatures ‘‘ occa- 
sionally secrete slimy threads (like the Limax arborum), by 
which they suspend themselves from the frond or stalk of a 
seaweed.’ || 

Rissoipz&. 


The use of threads is presumably general among Rissoide— 
small, often minute molluscs, which swarm on seaweeds and 
grasswrack in pools and shallows, as well as on and under stones 
in some of the deeper waters of the coast. It was in 183838 that 
Gray made an often quoted observation to the Zoological Society 
of London, that “the animal of Rissoa parva has the power of 
emitting a glutinous thread, by which it attaches itself to floating 


* Woodward, ‘ Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London,’ 1859, 
p. 204; and ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ (8), iv. (1859), 
p. 320. 

+ Gibbons, 1878, tom. cit. p. 839; 1879, l.c. 

} Gray, ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ (2), ix. (1852), 
p. 216. 

§ Gibbons, 1878, /.c.; 1879, l.c.; Jeffreys, ‘ British Conchology,’ iii. (1865), 
p. 863; Bouchard-Chantereaux, ‘Mémoires et Notices de la Société d’Agri- 
culture, du Commerce et des Arts, de Boulogne-sur-Mer, 1835, pp. 155-7; 
Gray, ‘ Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London,’ 1833, p. 116; 
A. @Orbigny, ‘Histoire Naturelle des Iles Canaries: Mollusques,’ 1889, 
p. 79. 

|| Jeffreys, tom. cit. p. 343. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 309 


_ seaweeds, and is enabled, when displaced, to recover its previous 
position” ;* and we find it is stated by Jeffreys, for Rissoa gene- 
rally, that the foot is grooved down the middle for about half its 
length towards the tail, whence it emits a glutinous thread, by, 
which the animal suspends itself to foreign bodies or to the sur- 
face of the water.+ ‘‘ Lying on a rock by the brink of a seaweed- 
covered pool left by the receding tide,” says Jeffreys, writing of 
Rissoa parva, “it is no less pleasant than curious to watch the 
active little creature go through its different exercises—creeping, 
floating, and spinning.”{ By “ floating” the author means, evi- 
dently, creeping at the surface of the water, a habit which here, 
as in other molluscs, seems intimately associated with that of 
“spinning.” The same naturalist mentions the latter habit in 
several other species: Rissoa membranacea, he says, “‘ occasion- 
ally floats, or suspends itself by a viscous thread”; R. vitrea 
**suspends itself by a single byssal thread, keeping the mouth of 
the shell closed by the operculum”; R. abyssicola ‘floats like 
its congeners, and suspends itself in the water by a single byssal 
thread”; R. pulcherrima, exceedingly agile both in creeping and 
floating, ‘‘ spins a delicate thread of attachment”; and the very 
tiny Rf. fulgida was frequently observed by the author “ spinning 
a fine transparent slimy thread, and thus hanging suspended to 
a bit of seaweed or to the surface of the water.” MR. cancellata, 
Jeffreys further says, “‘is active and bold, floats like its congeners, 
and spins a byssal thread instantly on being detached from a 
crawling position”; R. carinata,$ moreover, like R. cancellata, 
“adheres with some tenacity to the stones on which it is found, 
and, when detached, it also spins a fine byssal thread, by means 
of which it suspends itself in the water.”’|| This last species,{ 
_ according to Mr. Brockton Tomlin’s experience in the Channel 
Islands, is usually found under rather deeply-buried stones, to which 
it moors itself, he says, by a strong ‘‘ byssus’’;** each individual, 
this observer obligingly tells the writer, had more than one short 
thread, generally, as far as he remembers, four or five. Barleeia 
rubra, according to Jeffreys, creeps at the surface, foot uppermost, 


** Gray, ‘ Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London,’ 1833, p. 116. 
+ Jeffreys, op. cit., iv. (1867), p. 1. t Jeffreys, tom. cit., pp. 25, 26. 
§ R. striatula.. || Jeffreys, tom. cit., pp. 6, 10, 20, 32, 41, 43, 44, 
{| R. striatula. ** Tomlin, ‘ British Naturalist,’ ili. (1893), p. 123. 


310 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


like the Rissoe, and occasionally secretes a slight mucous filament, — 

by which it suspends itself from the surface of the water or from — 

seaweeds.* } 
HyYDROBIID. 

Lindstrom (1868) has referred to the spinning of a mucus- 
thread (by which the animal, with half-closed operculum, keeps 
itself suspended from the water-plants) as a character, among 
others, tending to associate the fresh-water Bythinieé with the 
estuarine Hydrobiids.t Bythinia, now always regarded as a 
Hydrobiid, is certainly a spinner, Mr. Tye having seen Bythinia 
tentaculata suspend itself, usually after ‘‘ floating,” the thread 
being attached to the surface of the water ;{ but the writer is not 
acquainted with observations on other members of the family. 
In 1894 I kept several specimens of Hydrobia ulve and one of 


H. ventrosa under observation for ten days, in a vessel of water | 


with weed, &c.; they often “‘ floated” (crept at the surface of the 
water), but were not seen to suspend themselves. 


SKENEIDA. 


Skenea planorbis, according to Jeffreys, ‘‘ occasionally sus- 
pends itself in the water by spinning a viscous thread with its 
foot.’ § 

JEFFREYSIIDE. 

Jeffreysia diaphana, also, according to the same author, 

‘‘ spins a slimy suspensile thread.”’|| 


LITIOPIDz. 


Intiopa melanostoma, a small, more or less Rissoa-like creature 
(less than a quarter of an inch in length of shell), an inhabitant of 
the gulf-weed of the mid-Atlantic (Sargasso Sea), is perhaps the 
most notorious of all the spinning molluscs. Its history is briefly 
as follows :— 

(1). Bélanger discovered the creature in 1826, and made a 
number of observations on its habits; and, on his return to 
France, read his notes to Rang, at the same time handing him 


* Jeffreys, tom. cit., p. 57. 

+ Lindstrom, ‘Om Gotlands nutida mollusker,’ 1868, p. 26. 

t Tye, 1874, 2. c.; 1878, J. c. 

§ Jeffreys, tom. cit., p. 66. || Jeffreys, tom. cit., p. 60. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 311 


Spirit specimens, and suggesting for the animals (regarded as 
belonging to two species), the names of Bombyxinus melanostoma 
and B. uva. 

_ (2). Rang, from information thus obtained, drew up a memoir, 
and published it in 1829. He disregarded Bélanger’s MS. names, 
however, and described the shells as Litiopa melanostoma and 
L. maculata.* 

(3). Bélanger (1833 ?), dissatisfied with Rang’s account, gave 
full details of his observations, the name Bombyxinus being here 
published for the first time.t 

(4). Kiener (1833) restated Bélanger’s observations, and 
united the two supposed species as Litiopa bombix.}t 

(5). Eydoux and Souleyet, during the voyage of the ‘ Bonite,’ 
re-collected specimens from the gulf-weed, and are believed to be 
the only naturalists, other than Bélanger, who have published 
observations on the living animal. This they did in 1839.§ 

(6). Naturalists agree that the two forms should be united; 
but Kiener’s name is inadmissible (as also are those of Bélanger, 
over which the names of Rang have priority of publication). The 
creature—with Litiopa maculata among the synonymy—is now 
known as Litiopa melanostoma. 

(7). Nearly all the books contain accounts of the animal’s 
spinning habits. ‘These, however, are derived from Rang and 
Kiener (without reference to the original notes of Bélanger and 
Kydoux and Souleyet); the information is thus unsatisfactory ; 
and the tale, being an often-told one, has grown considerably. 

Bélanger’s notes have the form of extracts from a log, and 
are evidently the result of careful observation. It was on June 
26th that the creature first came up with the gulf-weed, and, on 
shaking the weed to make the animals fall, Bélanger observed 
that some remained suspended, at a considerable distance, by an 


* Rang, ‘‘ Notice sur le Litiope (Litiopa), genre nouveau de Mollusque 
gastéropode,’’ ‘ Annales des Sciences Naturelles,’ xvi. (1829), pp. 803-7; and 
‘Manuel de l’Histoire Naturelle des Mollusques,’ 1829, pp. 26, 197, 198. 

+ Bélanger, ‘Sur les Litiopes (Litiopa, Rang), ou Bombyxins (Bombyzx- 
mus, Bélanger), Lesson’s ‘ Illustrations de Zoologie,’ 1831: appendix (1833 ?). 

{| Kiener, ‘‘ Quelques Observations sur le genre Litvope de M. Rang,” 
‘Annales des Sciences Naturelles,’ xxx. (1833), pp. 221-4. 

§ Eydoux and Souleyet, ‘‘ Observations sur le genre Litzope,” ‘ Annales 
Francaises et Etrangeres d’Anatomie et de Physiologie,’ iii. (1839), pp. 252-6. 


312 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


imperceptible thread like that of a small Spider. The thread 
proceeded from the foot of the mollusc. When the foot was 
touched with the finger, a thread was drawn out as the finger was 
slowly moved away, and when the finger was lifted in the air 
the animal remained suspended to it for a long time, and for a 
great distance—more than three feet; even when moved about 
considerably, and otherwise somewhat severely tested, the crea- 
ture did not fall; and more than a score were experimented 
upon, always with the same result. The animal—in some at 
least of these cases—hung, not in its native element, but in the 
air. On June 28th and 29th more weed inhabited by this animal 
was fished up, and Bélanger again observed the creature’s spin- 
ning habits.* Speculating upon the use of the thread, he 
remarks that the creature, born, living, and reproducing on 
floating weed, incessantly tossed with more or less violence by 
the very deep ocean, would be lost, when detached by a wave, had 
it not this faculty of spinning a silk which, like a cable, holds it 
to its habitat. On July 8th further weed was fished up, but the 
molluscs were now less numerous; and, having been out of the 
water some time when experimented upon, but few remained 
suspended after the weed had been shaken. Providing himself 
with a bucket of sea-water, however, Bélanger was able to make 
several observations ; some of the animals adhered to his finger, 
and hung therefrom, both in the air and in the water. An 
individual which had lowered itself from the weed, on being 
placed in the water, remained suspended, and, though moved 
from one side of the bucket to the other, made to sink to the 
bottom and lifted up again, it still retained its hold. At length 
the observer allowed the weed to float on the surface, and after 
some time, to his great satisfaction, he saw the animal ascend by 
its thread, and replace itself upon the frond from which it had 
been suspended. Others which were at the bottom of the bucket, 
on being moved with a branch of weed, attached their silk to it ; 

* The author refers also to a bundle of weed, containing a quantity of 
eggs, supposed, no doubt erroneously, to be those of Litiopa. The eggs were 
united by numerous threads similar to those of the mollusc; each egg was 
attached by a particular thread, and the whole mass was so strongly fastened 
together that it was with difficulty that a part was detached. This structure, 


it can hardly be doubted, was the ‘nest’? of the little Gulf-weed Fish, 
Pterophryne. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 313 


and when the branch was left floating at the surface some ascended 
to it by the thread, while others fell again to the bottom. Another 
_ observation, which the author regarded as of much interest, was 
as follows :—He saw issue from two or three of those which were 
at the bottom of the bucket a little bubble of air, which rose 
slowly ; and, in trying to move it with a frond of the weed, he 
saw the animal—holding to the bubble by means of its silk—rise 
through the water. Speculating upon this last observation, 
Bélanger supposes that the creature would not be entirely lost 
even if the shaking, which had detached it from the weed, were 
also strong enough to break its thread ; though not anchored it 
would still have a lifebuoy, and this buoy, floating on the surface 
of the water, and coming in contact with another plant, would 
enable the animal to ascend to a new home. Further, the author 
even thought it possible that the creatures might thus voluntarily 
change their positions; a family, he supposes, might find their 
plant insufficient to feed their increasing numbers; whereupon 
some of them, seeking new feeding-grounds, might abandon 
themselves to the water, and wait, suspended to their bubbles, 
till a new plant chanced to be carried to them by the waves. 
Finally, on Aug. 27th, the creature still occurred on the weed, 
but in small quantity, and mostly very young. Of those which 
remained suspended after the weed had been shaken, one of the 
larger ones was observed, while thus hanging in the air, to 
reascend by its thread. Placing the animals at the bottom of a 
bucket of water, the observer left them for the night; but in the 
morning all were dead, none having ascended to the surface or to 
the floating weed. Eydoux and Souleyet obtained numerous 
Specimens, and, on shaking the weed on which the animals were 
brought up, they had no difficulty in confirming Bélanger’s 
statements about the suspensory thread. ‘They appear to have 
been at considerable pains, however, in attempting, unsuccess- 
fully, to confirm the observations about the mucus-invested air- 
bubble; specimens were placed at the bottom of deep vessels of 
water, and allowed to remain there for a considerable time, but 
none ascended by means of a bubble. Some crept up the sides 
of the vessels to the water-surface, under which they crept like 
other gastropods. The appendages which characterize the upper 
part of the foot of Litiopa may be useful, these authors think, in 


314 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


helping to keep the animal at the surface. Notwithstanding 
Rang’s remark that the thread is doubtless formed of a special 


7 


secretion, Eydoux and Souleyet think it probable that it consists — 


merely of locomotory mucus, which, in these molluscs, may 
possibly possess special characters. Rang, it may be added, 
while examining spirit specimens, found, under the foot, a little 
glairy mass, which attached itself to the point of the scalpel, and 
was easily drawn out into a thread a foot and a half long; each 
specimen presented the same peculiarity, and Rang concluded 
that this was the substance from which the thread is made; it 
seems more probable, however, that the little masses were the 
remains of threads already spun, and perhaps reascended by the 
animal. 

The above, the present writer believes, is all that is known of 
the spinning habits of Litiopa. These habits are certainly of a 
surprising character: the length of the apparently rapidly made 
thread, the animal’s security upon it, and the facts that it can 
produce and afterwards ascend by it, not only in its native 
element, but also in the air, are points of special interest. As 
to the statements in the books, one may quote, for example, from 
Johnston’s ‘Introduction to Conchology’:— 


“The habits of the Litiopa are not less worthy of your notice. This is 
a small Snail, born amid the gulf-weed, where it is destined to pass the 
whole of its life. The foot, though rather narrow and short, is of the usual 
character, and, having no extra hold, the Snail is apt to be swept off its 
weed ; but the accident is provided against, for the creature, like a Spider, 
spins a thread of the viscous fluid that exudes from the foot to check its 
downward fall, and enable it to regain the pristine site. But suppose the 
shock has severed their connexion, or that the Litiopa finds it necessary 
to remove, from a deficiency of food, to a richer pasture, the thread is still 
made available to recovery or removal. In its fall, accidental or purposed, 
an air-bubble is emitted, probably from the branchial cavity, which rises 
slowly through the water, and as the Snail has enveloped it with its slime, 
this is drawn out into threads as the bubble ascends; and now, having 
a buoy and ladder whereon to climb to the surface, it waits suspended 
until that bubble comes into contact with the weeds that everywhere float 
around ! 


* Johnston, ‘Introduction to Conchology,’ 1850, p, 1384; with references 
to Rang and Kiener. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 315 


The speculations of Bélanger, it will be observed, here appear 
as statements of established facts, Johnston having been misled 
by Kiener, whose restatement of Bélanger’s observations wants 
some of the precision of the original notes. Statements in other 
books (some adapted from Johnston) also exceed what is really 
known ; and some are further objectionable from the fact that 
they do not make it clear that suspension is likely to be an 
occasional circumstance, not the usual BO under which 
the animal lives. 

Alaba picta, a Litiopid found by A. Adams among Zostera in 
shallow water in the seas of Japan, is stated by him to spin a 
pellucid thread, with great rapidity, from a viscous secretion 
‘*‘emitted from a gland near the end of the tail’; it also creeps 
at the surface of the water, and, when fatigued, suspends itself, 
apex downwards, by means of the thread which is attached to the 
surface.* 

VALVATIDE. 


Valvata piscinalis (familiar in our ponds and canals) was 
observed to use a thread by Laurent. He noticed that the 
animals, in crawling at the surface of water, deposited there a 
trail of mucus, and that. when made to fall, some of them 
remained suspended to the floating trail by a thread ; similarly, 
others were sustained in the water when forced to leave the 
branches of the plants on which they lived. In the former case 
Some were seen to remount to the surface of the water by 
ascending their thread, which was gathered up by the foot.+ 
Mr. A. E. Boycott has written of the same animal, immature 
Specimens of which, in captivity, were seen by him actively 
engaged in thread-spinning :—‘“‘ Their usual mode of procedure 
was to crawl up the side of a glass vessel nearly to the surface of 
the water; they then gave one or two twisting motions, and 
crawled out on the under surface of the water, leaving a thread 
joining them to their point of departure. They then either sank 
slowly, remained floating, or sank about half way, where they 
stopped.’ The thread, the presence of which was easily demon- 


* A. Adams, ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ (8), x. (1862), 
pp. 293-5, 419. 

+ Laurent, ‘Extraits des Proces- Verbaux des Séances de la Société Philo- 
matique de Paris,’ 1841, pp. 118-9, 


316 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


strated with a pin, was in most cases sufficiently strong to enable 
the observer to raise the animal to the surface, but not out of the 


water.* 
CYPREIDA, 


Our little Cowry (Cyprea europea) makes considerable use of 
a thread, a fact first noticed by Charles Kingsley, who wrote to 
Gosse, in 1854, that he had seen the animal suspend itself from 
the under side of low-tide rocks by a glutinous thread an inch and 
more in length; in captivity, further, he saw it “float on the 
surface by means of a similar thread attached to a glutinous 
bubble.”’+ According to a paper by Mr. L. St. G. Byne, the 
animal is occasionally seen at Teignmouth, hanging by its 
‘‘byssus”’ on the rocks at low tide.{ This statement, as the 
writer learns from Mr. Byne, is made on the authority of a 
reliable collector, who mentions, amongst other things, that on 
lifting a boulder he saw one of these molluscs hang from it by a 
thread 4-5 in. long. Mr. Hornell, from observations made pre- 
sumably at Jersey, writes in an interesting manner on the same 
subject. In confinement in a tank, he says, the little animal 
frequently crawls foot-uppermost along the surface of the water, 
and occasionally may be seen to form a little disc of mucus, from 
which it lowers itself gently by a mucous thread till it hangs in 
mid-water, dangling in the fashion of a Spider at the end of its 
silken cord. ‘‘ This habit of the Cowry is to be correlated,” 
Mr. Hornell adds, “to that more familiar and natural one so 
readily verified by any observer who visits the low-tide caves and 
gullies where, amongst Sponges and Ascidians, this animal loves 
so to live. Here, when the tide recedes, Cowries more or less 
enveloped in their bright-coloured mantle robes are often seen 
passively hanging suspended from the gully’s roof, or from points 
and jutting ledges, by a stout mucous thread.” § 


CERITHIUD. 
In this family we have notes on a Bittiwm, a Cerithiopsis, and 


* Boycott, “‘ Valvata piscinalis as a Spinner,” ‘Science Gossip’ (n.s.), 
ii. (1895), p. 82. 

+ ‘Charles Kingsley; his Letters and Memories of his Life,’ edited by 
his Wife, ed. 3, i. (1877), p. 408. 

{ Byne, ‘Journal of Conchology,’ vii. (1893), p. 187. 

§ Hornell, ‘ Journal of Marine Zoology,’ ii. (1896), pp. 59-61. 


ey Ri 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 317 


a Cerithidea ; general statements occur in the books also for 
Cerithium and Potamides, but these rise out of synonymy, the 
animals referred to being respectively Bittium and Cerithidea. 
Our little Bittiwm reticulatum,* according to Jeffreys, ‘‘ crawls 
actively and quickly by means of its long foot, and occasionally 
suspends itself by a byssal filament to a bit of floating seaweed, 
or to the side of the vessel in which it is kept.” + Cerithiopsis 
tubercularis, another little mollusc of our coasts (shell generally 
about + in. long), resembles the Bittiwm in its active crawling 


habits. ‘“ When at rest,” according to Jeffreys, “it spins a fine 


transparent thread, which issues from the opening in the centre 
of the foot-sole, its end being attached by the point of the foot 
to some foreign substance.”” The author, on one occasion, drew 
the shell up by the thread with a camel’s-hair brush, and kept 
the creature thus suspended in the water for several seconds, the 
foot being doubled up.j Cerithidea obtusa,§ which is a mollusc 
of good size, presents one of the most curious of the cases 
noticed in this paper. It lives in brackish water, in mangrove- 
swamps, and the mouths of rivers in Singapore and Borneo ; 
sometimes it crawls on stones and leaves in the neighbourhood, 
and, according to the observations of A. Adams, it is not un- 
frequently found suspended by glutinous threads to boughs and 
the roots of the mangroves, as represented in fig. 6. Further, 
according to the same observer, ‘‘ when the animal hybernates, 
it retracts itself into the shell, and brings its operculum to fit 
closely into the aperture, after having previously affixed sixty or 
seventy glassy, transparent, glutinous threads to the place of 
attachment, when they occupy the outer or right lip and extend 
half-way round the operculum.” || Von Martens has observed 
that the attachment of this mollusc and of “ Megalomastoma 
suspensum”’ (fig. 4) make a remarkable approach to the attach- 
ment of bivalves by a byssus,{1 but this remark, the writer pre- 

* Cerithium reticulatum. 

| Jeffreys, tom. cit. p. 260. t Ibid. p. 268. 

§ Cerithiwm truncatum, C. obtusum. 

|| A. Adams, ‘ Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. Samarang: Mollusca,’ 
1848, pp. 48-4; and see also ‘ Narrative of the Voyage,’ ii. (1848), pp. 389, 
509; ‘Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London,’ 1847, pp. 21-2; 
and ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History,’ xix. (1847), pp. 413-4, 

{i E. v. Martens, ‘ Zoologischer Anzeiger,’ i. (1878), p. 251. 


318 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


sumes, refers merely to the appearance of the figures ; for nothing 
appears to be known of the manner in which the threads are pro- 
duced and attached. Adams’s observations are referred to in 
nearly all the books, and figures based on his are found in Wood- 
ward and in Keferstein, that of the former having been repeated 
by Fischer and twice by Tryon.* Mr. Tye, who refers to 
Woodward, has by mistake attributed the observations to Ceri- 
thidea decollata,t an animal which does not appear to fix itself by 
threads, Dr. Gibbons having reported that large numbers seen 
by him on trunks of marsh trees in Natal were attached, not by 
threads, but by ‘‘atrifle of brittle mucus passing from the lip to 
the tree,” a mode of attachment, as Dr. Gibbons says, resembling 
that of brackish water Littorine.}{ 


PLANAXIDA. 


Planaxis has been listed among thread-making molluses by 
Dr. Macdonald,§ but the writer does not know on what authority. 


SoLARIIDZ. 


According to Mr. Harper Pease, two forms of Torinia 
(Hawaiian Islands) ‘‘suspend themselves by strong gelatinous 
threads, one of which will sustain the weight of several shells, 
and can be drawn out four or five inches”; the creatures are 
found almost invariably upon branched coral. || 


PYRAMIDELLIDZA. 


Among the crowd of little conical-shelled molluscs of the 
genus Odostomia, the use of a thread has been observed by 
Jeffreys in Odostomia warreni, whose foot is remarkable from 
being forked at the extremity like the tail of a Swallow. The 


* Woodward, ‘Manual of the Mollusca,’ 1851, fig. 78; Keferstein, 
‘Bronn’s Klassen und Ordnungen des Thier-reichs,’ iii. (1862-6), pl. lxxxii. 
fig. 9; Fischer, ‘Manuel de Conchyliologie,’ 1884, fig. 449; Tryon, ‘ Struc- 
tural and Systematic Conchology,’ ii. (1883), pl. lxx. fig. 73; ‘ Manual of 
Conchology,’ ix. (1887), pl. xix. fig. 6. 

+ Tye, ‘Quarterly Journal of Conchology,’ i. (1878), p. 409. 

| Gibbons, ‘ Journal of Conchology,’ ii. (1879), p. 134. 

§ Macdonald, ‘Journal of the Proceedings of the Linnean Society’: 
Zoology, v. (1861), p. 209. 

|| Pease, ‘American Journal of Conchology,’ v. (1870), p. 81. 


SPINNING MOLLUSCS. 319 


animal crept at the surface of the water like other gastropods, 
‘ and one individual spun a delicate glutinous filament from the 
middle of the sole of the foot, and kept itself suspended for some 
time in the water, with the point of the shell downwards. 
O. acicula, Jeffreys adds, has the same habit. Both animals are 
inhabitants of our own coasts.* 


EULIMID. 


Eulima intermedia, another inhabitant of our coasts, creeps 
at the surface, and, according to Jeffreys, ‘‘ it remains suspended 
in that posture by means of a byssal thread, the operculum then 
_ closing the mouth of the shell” ;+ statements, apparently applying 
_ to the genus generally, which occur in Fischer and in Tryon,} 
have their origin presumably in this observation. 


MITRIDz&. 


The only representative of the Mitre-shells—and of a con- 
siderable number of surrounding families—of which we have any 
note is the little ‘‘ Mitra saltata,” Pease—probably the young of 
some larger Mitrid—a native of the shores of the islands of the 
Central Pacific. It is described as an elegant little mollusc, 
found living in hollows of coral-rock; and it is certainly a 
creature of remarkable habits. When disturbed (Mr. Pease 
found) it would skip five or six inches in a horizontal line, from 
one side of the cavity to the other, at the same time spinning out 
a very fine thread ; and, when held in the hand, it would jump 
off, suspending itself by athread to a distance of 2-3 ft.§ 


PLEUROTOMATIDA. | 


Another isolated note, the last we have to give, relates to 
— Mangilia nebula,|| a little molluse of our own coasts. The animal 
is exceedingly active, and the Rev. R. N. Dennis, who placed 


* Jeffreys, ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’ (4), ii. (1868), 
p. 279; British Association Reports, 1868, p. 233; op. crt. v. (1869), p. 212. 

+ Jeffreys, op. cit. iv. (1867), p. 204. 

{ Fischer, ‘Manuel de Conchyliologie,’ 1885, p. 782; Tryon, ‘ Manual 
of Conchology,’ viii. (1886), p. 259. 

§ Pease, ‘Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London,’ 1865, 
pp. 512-3 ; and see Garrett, ‘ Journal of Conchology,’ iii. (1880), p. 71. 

|| Plewrotoma nebula. 


320 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


specimens in a basin of sea-water, observed that they crawled to 
the edge and suspended themselves by a thread.* 


EXPLANATION OF PuaTteE III. 


ss 


en 


Fic. 1.—A Water-Snail (Limnea auricularia) hanging by a thread from — 


the surface of the water in an aquarium. After Taylor, ‘ Monograph of the 
Land and Freshwater Mollusca of the British Isles,’ i. (1899), p. 318 (fig. 610). 

Fic. 2.—A fresh-water Limpet (Ancylus lacustris) using a thread. From 
a sketch by Prof. Cockerell. 

Fic. 3.—Diagram illustrating the use of threads by aquatic Pulmonate 
Molluses, based for the most part on observations recorded for Physa hyp- 
norum, by Mr. G. 8. Tye. The animal is ordinarily slightly lighter than 
water :—a, an individual crawling through the water towards the surface, 
leaving its Jocomotory mucus behind in the form of a thread, which retains 
the animal, and prevents its sudden rise to the surface; B, the animal at the 
surface, taking in a supply of air—the thread, having been continued as a 
floating slime-trail, is now attached to the surface ; c, the animal returning 
by descending its thread; another individual is making use of the fixed 
thread for ascent. An upward journey (A) may be abandoned, the animal in 
that case returning upon its unattached thread, pb. 

Fic. 4.—‘‘ Megalomastoma suspensum,” a land operculate of doubtful 
identity, at rest, suspended by a number of threads from a twig; probably 
much enlarged. After Swainson, ‘Treatise on Malacology,’ 1840, fig. 29; 
presumably from a sketch by Guilding. 

Fic. 5.—Chondropoma dentatum, a land operculate, at rest, suspended by 
a short thread; slightly enlarged. After Binney, ‘ Terrestrial Air-breathing 
Mollusks of the United States,’ ii. (1851), p. 347. 

Fic. 6.— Cerithidea obtusa, a brackish-water, somewhat amphibious, 
operculate mollusc, at rest, suspended to a bough by a number of short 
threads. After A. Adams, ‘ Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. Samarang: 
Mollusca,’ 1848, pl. xiii. fig. 3b. 


* Dennis, in Jeffreys, tom. cit. p. 386. 


(BoE) 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


MAMMALIA. 


In the British Gallery of the National Museum the Harvest Mouse 
(Mus minutus) is at present unrepresented, on account of the lack of speci- 
mens. I therefore venture to ask the kind assistance of readers of ‘The 

_Zoologist ’ in remedying this deficiency. I may add that specimens of all 
the British Bats, with the exception of the Noctule and the Long-eared 
species, are likewise wanted for the same gallery. Specimens should be 
forwarded to me at the Museum:— R. Lypexker (British Museum (Natural 
History) London, S.W.). 


AVES. 


Mistle-Thrush attacking Squirrel.—On April 27th last I was noticing 
the nest of a Mistle-Thrush (Turdus viscivorus) in an oak tree, when a 
Squirrel by chance passed along the branch on which the nest was; the 
_ female (I presume) left the nest and attacked the Squirrel violently, darting 
furiously at it and screeching loudly, until it had passed on to the next tree ; 
she then squat upon a limb for a few moments, with wings partly extended 
and drooping, again taking possession of the nest a few minutes afterwards. 
—Sranvey Lewis (Wells, Somerset). 


Crossbills at Shrewsbury.—On June 24th and 25th a number of 
Crossbills (Loata curvirostra) visited my garden. I counted seventeen in 
one place, and there were others in different parts. As most of them were 
young birds, I imagine they have been bred in the neighbourhood. They 
were wonderfully tame, feeding close to the windows on the seeds of the 
wych-elm, with which the lawn was covered. I may mention that a pair of 
these birds frequented my garden in January and February of this year. 
Probably they had a nest, but I could never find it—R. H. Ramsporsam 
(Merle Brace, Shrewsbury). 


Early Appearance of Swift.—The arrival of our summer migrants has 
in almost every instance been unusually late, and now (May 15th) the 
Swallow and the two species of Martin are not abundant ; but this need not 
be wondered at when we consider the wintry weather that has prevailed. 
The Swifts (Cypselus apus) seem to have come in fair numbers, and, strange 
to say, I saw two on April 26th, which was a very early date, especially 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., July, 1900. Z 


322 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


during this exceptional spring, for this usually late visitor. In ordinary 
seasons it is seldom seen with us before the end of April or beginning of 
May. I have a record as early as April 18th. But this season everything 
ornithological, entomological, and botanical appears uncertain, and out of its 
usual order.—G. B. Corgin (Ringwood, Hants). 


The Great Spotted Woodpecker in Surrey.—Dendrocopus major has 
become so rare a bird in Surrey that the successful rearing of a brood 
deserves to be recorded. arly in June I happened to notice a hole in the 
trunk of a partially decayed birch tree in an unfrequented part of the Hurt 
Wood, near Shere. The hole was circular, about fifteen feet from the 
ground, and appeared to be the work of a Woodpecker. On tapping the 
trunk the cries of young birds greeted my ears, and I therefore returned 
the following morning with a glass to watch for the old birds, and ascertain 
their species. After waiting about twenty minutes a female Great Spotted 
Woodpecker suddenly flew against the trunk, but, catching sight of me, 
swerved aside and retired to a small oak tree a few vards from where I sat. 
Here she perched upon a horizontal branch, lengthways, after the fashion 
of a Nightjar. She remained almost motionless (thinking apparently that 
she was invisible), and I was able for a quarter of an hour to examine her 
with my glass. She had in her bill a large bunch of insects, which, finding 
inconvenient, she deposited on the branch in front, but removed when taking 
her departure. When the male bird flew to the hole, as happened in due 
course, she warned him of the danger with loud and alarming cries of 
“‘ quick,” often repeated at regular intervals. Both birds then retired to a 
distance, and kept up their answering alarm-notes. After about half an 
hour the male flew against the further side of the birch, and peered round 
the side of the trunk in my direction. The young ones had by now become 
vociferous ; but, though I remained about an hour, neither parent ventured 
to enter the hole. I am told that the brood was fledged a few days later. 
The Lesser Woodpecker (D. minor) may still be seen in a good many places 
in Surrey, and, though very shy and difficult to discover, is not so very rare. 
Gecinus viridis is abundant, and, I think, increasing in the unbuilt-over 
portions of Surrey.—Haroxp Russext (Shere, Surrey). 


Hoopoe in Hants and Dorset.— From information received from friends 
residing in widely separated localities, both east and west, and whose 
descriptions could be only referable to this handsome and conspicuous 


species (Upupa epops), I infer that it has visited us in some numbers, con- . 


trary to its usual scarcity ; and on May 2nd I saw a specimen which had 
been found dead somewhere on the borders of Dorset, apparently starved. 
The body was very emaciated, and one wing had been injured, as if by a 
stone, which must have prevented flight, and possibly was the cause of its 


a? = 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 323 


poor condition. I am glad to say I have not heard of a specimen having 
been wilfully killed, and I suppose it is too much to hope that the birds 
recorded were of Hampshire origin. A writer in the ‘ Field’ of January 
last recorded the nesting of the species two consecutive years in South 
Hants, the exact localities being wisely withheld for obvious reasons.— 
G. B. Corsin (Ringwood, Hants). 


Spoonbill at Great Yarmouth.—On June 7th a magnificent Spoonbill 
(Platalea leucorodia) was seen on Breydon, where I put it up. Black- 
headed Gulls, out of curiosity, were keeping it company, and they followed 
it to another resting place, not he them. I also saw two on the night of 
June 9th (not including the same bird), in company with Black-backed 
Gulls. Twelve were seen on June 4th for an hour or two on Breydon, and 
afterwards observed at Waxham.—Arruur Parrurson (Ibis House, Great 
Yarmouth). 


Hybrid Pheasant.—It is well known how readily the various species of 
Pheasants interbreed— sometimes even with the poultry of the farmyard— 
and this to such an extent that what is said to be the original stock, with 
dark uniform steel-blue neck and dark legs, is now seldom met with where 
extensive rearing is practised. Thus the size and consequent weight have 
in many instances deteriorated, and the plumage has become so varied that 
in some cases it is almost impossible to say to what particular species or 
“strain” in this most beautiful plumaged class of birds some individual 
specimens belong. I am alluding to birds in a semi-wild state, and not to 
those kept in confinement, for in the latter case, if I may judge from a series 
of skins I saw some time since, the variation in plumage is very great, 
especially with the Amherst and Golden Pheasant. I have heard it 
asserted—whether rightly or wrongly, I cannot say—that the Common 
Pheasant (meaning, I suppose, the hybridized bird so commonly reared) 
seldom interbreeds with the “Golden.” In the spring of 1898 a game- 
keeper informed me that in one of his covers he had seen a common cock 
Pheasant consorting with a hen “ Golden,” and subsequently he found her 
nest, with, I believe, seven eggs in it, five of which were duly hatched. 
During the shooting season of 1898-9 one of these birds was killed—a 
cock—of such a peculiar colour that the proprietor of the shooting had it 
preserved and mounted. It was of a uniform reddish cinnamon, except the 

neck, which was of a bronze-copper shot with shades of purple. The 
development of its plumage was, however, normal, except the tail, which 
was longer than in the ordinary bird. Last season two others of the brood 
were killed, and, being a year older, one of them at least was more fully 
developed ; but, although a second season’s bird, it had no indication of 
spurs. Its tail was of the same form, but much longer than in the ordinary 


Z% 


324 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


cock ; the two upper feathers of a pale buff, with slight indications of darker 
transverse markings ; under feathers barred after the manner of Golden. 
Body: under parts uniform bright reddish brown; back more yellow, 
dappled thickly with ash-brown and black; neck a purple-bronze, with 
small portion of scarlet on cheeks. It had no crest, but the “cape” or 
‘ tippet”” was represented by a number of feathers two and a half or three 
inches long, of a uniform rich brown colour, which hung in a pendent 
manner from the back of the head, thus giving the bird a very peculiar 
appearance.—G. B. CorBin (Ringwood, Hants). 


Albatross near Faroe. —It may interest readers of ‘ The Zoologist,’ to 
hear of the occurrence of another specimen of the Albatross (Diomedea 
melanophrys) in or near Faroe. Miss Elizabeth R. Taylor, who is residing 
in Faroe for the purpose of studying these isles and their natural and other 
history, writes me as follows:—‘ It has occurred to me that you may be 
interested in knowing that another Albatross has been shot near the Faroes 
this year (the last one being the Albatross of Mygganoes, shot in 1894). 
This one was shot at sea, on the Faroe Banks, about seventy or eighty 
miles south-west of Thorshavn. I heard of it just before I left Thorshavn, 
and did not ascertain any particulars, whether male or female. It is of the 
same species as the Mygganoes one. The taxidermist at Naalsoe is pre- 
paring the specimen now, and [| suppose it will be sent to the Museum at 
Copenhagen.” With reference to the above interesting communication, | 
need not refer to the previous records of the Albatross in the Faroe Seas, 
as these records are so recent. However, 1 may mention that Mr. Thomas 
Parkin, with whom I have been in correspondeuce on the subject, intends 
to bring out a monograph of the genus, and has already delivered a lecture 
upon the different species. This lecture was given before the Hastings and 
St. Leonards Natural History Society at the Museum in the Brassey In- 
stitute on April 10th last, and printed in the ‘ Hastings and St. Leonards 


Observer’ of the 14th of that month.—J. A. Harvis-Brown (Dunipace 
House, Larbert, N.B.). 


Migration Notes from Great Yarmouth.—The spring migration of 
1900, more particularly of the Grallatores, has been, in this neighbourhood, 
a very disappointing one, the prevailing winds being north-east, or there- 
abouts, and the weather exceptionally bleak and cold. South-easterly winds 
are those most favourable to the visitation of the water-loving species, 
although any wind from the southward suits the land-birds equally well. 
The other side of the North Sea has no doubt seen the bulk of passing 
migrants, and many birds must have put off their journey until the last 
extremity, and then have gone on straight ahead without gossiping, as they 
do in favourable seasons on Breydon, resting and feeding, thus breaking 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 325 


- thetrip. The following extracts from my note-book will give a pretty fair idea 
of these movements this season: —Wigeon fairly plentiful, Feb. 17th. Small 
' bunches of Larks flying north-east, Feb. 20th. Fifty Curlews on Breydon, 
Feb. 27th. Flocks of Ringed Plovers on Breydon, March Ist. Sailed past 
several Dunlins, on March 28th, on edge of “ flat”; they were as grey as 
in depth of winter. About two thousand Starlings ona marsh, March 28th. 
Late for so big an assembly. Query, were they late-hatched birds? Will 
_ they remain unnesting? Numbers of Little Auks washing ashore dead ; 
thirty picked up last week in March; also some Puffins. Wedge-flights of 
Starlings moving seawards, March 29th. About one hundred Wigeon on 
Breydon, April 17th. Six Geese passing over (Whitefronts ?), April 18th. 
A few Godwits reported on beach, April 17th. Sailed into flock of one 
hundred Wigeon, April 20th. Several Kentish and Common Crows 
together on Breydon mud-flats, April 20th. Five Kentish Crows on 
Breydon late as May 11th; one had a drooping wing; the other laggards 
were no doubt anxiously wishing to be off, but loath to leave him; they were 
gone next day. One Spoonbill said to have been seen a few hours on 
' Breydon on April 28th ; on June 7th twelve were reported to me as seen 
there ; I was on Breydon myself, but it was so rough I went in a leeward 
direction, otherwise I should have gone by the very flat they were said to 
have rested upon for only an hour or two. I did not see them. By one 


or two they were mistaken for Swans, a not unusual error to those who 
see them at a distance. Several Grey Plovers on Breydon, May 5th; 
wind south-west, suddenly veering to south-east by next morning—a shift 
I expected. A precisely similar thing happened on May 25th, the 
wind backing from north-east to south-east in a few hours (cf. ante, 
p. 162). Some delightfully ‘‘ Black-breasted ” Plovers (old gunner’s nick- 
name for Greys) on Breydon, May 10th; they were very tired, and I 
“quanted” to within a few paces and watched them. Only Knots seen, 
May 9th; about five or six. Seven Swifts arrived on May 11th; an early 
arrival. We usually expect five pairs. ‘They vanished for a few days, it 
being cruelly cold, and returned again. Only very few Godwits. Saw three 
on May 12th; have seen only one or two others since. Saw a pair of 
Shovelers on May 16th; they undoubtedly nested in the vicinity, but, as 
they have frequently visited Breydon since, their nest may have been rifled. 
Saw them to-day (June 10th). Observed Whimbrel in couples, May 16th; 
they were numerous a week before, hunting singly or in small scattered 
flocks. Several there as late as to-day (June 10th). A few Yellow Wag- 
tails on marshes, May 16th, by no means plentiful as of yore. Saw one 
Turnstone, May 28th; only one I have seen. A goodly sized flock of 
Ringed Plovers on May 27th; a few on Breydon to-day (June 10th), 
possibly birds nesting on the adjacent.coast ; also three Dunlins, probably 


326 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


non-nesters. Have seen no Terns, neither Black, Arctic, or Common. | 


Hirundines rather numerous in adjacent villages. Cuckoos numerous ; 
locally nesting Redshanks show no falling off this season ; Common Sand- 
Pipers were fairly numerous last month. There may be nothing recorded 
above of any importance, but the bare summary of my observations will 
show how scanty has been the local record, and may serve for comparison 
with other districts. ARTHUR Patrrrson (Ibis House, Great Yarmouth). 


ARACHNIDA. 


Rare English Ticks.—The study of Ticks (Ivodide) has been much 
neglected in England. Mr. EH. G. Wheler, of Alnwick, has, however, 
recently taken up the subject, and has published, in ‘ Science Gossip,’ a 
series of short papers upon some of our British species. In the hope of 
inducing others to take an interest in these parasites, I venture to put on 
record the occurrence in England of two species which have not, so far as I 
can ascertain, been previously recorded from this country, and of a third 
which is certainly not common. It is true that Mons. G. Neumann, in his 
recent monograph of this group, states that he has seen specimens of the 
first two, belonging to the Bureau of Animal Industry of Washington, that 
were taken off English Sheep; but whether the Ticks were collected off 
Sheep in England, or after their importation to America (which is a very 
different matter), 1 am unable to say. I may add that Mr. Wheler took up 
the study of these parasites on account of their connection with the malady 
known as “louping ill,” which is so destructive to Sheep in some parts of 
England. It is known, too, that great havoc is wrought amongst cattle. in 
the United States and our own colonies by these pestilent Arachnids ; and, 
since there are some reasons for supposing that there may also be a causal 
connection between the bites of these parasites and that deadly tropical 
disease, ‘‘ black-water fever,” it is safe to predict that within the next few 
years there will be a boom in Ticks rivalling that in Mosquitoes at the 
present time. I should be grateful for any specimens readers of ‘The 
Zoologist’ may come across. They should be preserved in alcohol. 

1. Dermacentor reticulatus, Fabr. — Specimens of this Tick were sent 
to the British Museum for determination by Mr. Richardson, of Stoke 
House, Revelstoke, Devon. Mr, Richardson writes :—‘ These Ticks are a 
pest of this immediate neighbourhood. They do not bite human beings, but 
punish Sheep and Dogs like the ordinary Tick. A farmer tells me they 
were not known here fifteen years ago, and that they appear about January, 
and disappear about May, being very plentiful in March and April. It is 
strange that they should not be known a few miles away.” 

2. Haemaphysalis punctata, Can. and Fanz.—Specimens of this species 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 327 


were taken by Mr. F’. Pickard-Cambridge at Dungeness. They were found 
amongst the shingle on the beach, and also upon a Hedgehog. 

3. Hyalomma affine, Neam.— A specimen (a gravid female) of this 
species was sent for determination to the British Museum in May, 1898, 
by Mr. P. C. Essex, who picked it up at Feltham. The specimen is very 
much larger than the ordinary British Tick, and closely resembles the so- 
called «‘ Camel-Tick” of Egypt and India. My suspicion that it actually 
was an example of this species that had interested Mr. Essex was partially 
confirmed at the time by my inquiry eliciting the information that a travel- 
ling menagerie had passed through Feltham a short while before. Subse- 
quent examination of the specimen, however, has shown that it is referable 
to H. affine, Neumann, a species which its describer mentions as common 
on Tortoises (Testudo gre@ca and mauritanica), and records as taken in 
England off one of these reptiles. Hence there is no reason to doubt that 
the Feltham specimen was introduced, and is not a descendant of British- 
born parents.—R. I. Pocock (Nat. Hist. Museum, South Kensington). 


ORGANIC EVOLUTION. 


‘In the last copy of ‘The Zoologist’ which has come to hand in this 
out-of-the-way part of the world (Mashonaland), I find that Mr. Distant 
has terminated his series of deeply interesting articles on ‘“ Biological 
Suggestions,” relating to “ Assimilative Colouration and Mimicry.” In 
these articles he has brought together a most valuable collection of 
observations and remarks, made by all sorts and conditions of men, 
upon the fascinating problems of animal colouration, a collection which 
bears eloquent testimony to the wide and careful reading of the author ; 
indeed, although it may appear ungrateful to say so, the material offered 
for the contemplation of the reader is almost bewilderingly profuse—so 
much so, in my opinion, as frequently to obscure the real aim and object 
of the essays under a mass of citations. Thus, although many of the points 
raised by Mr. Distant appeared to be open to discussion, it seemed advisable 
to see the articles as a whole before attempting to comment on the conclu- 
sions which he suggests should be drawn from the records therein brought 
forward. I deal only with his remarks on “ Assimilative Colouration,” pub- 
lished in Sept. and Nov. 1898 (Zool. ser. 1v. vol. ii. pp. 877 and 453). 

If I hava rightly comprehended Mr. Distant’s meaning, his general 
object is to show that the theory of natural selection has been pushed too far 
by some of its supporters in their endeavour to explain colouring in nature, 
and to this end he propounds two suggestions: primarily, that “in the long 
past animals were uniformly and assimilatively coloured in connection with 
their principal surroundings ” (/.c., p. 461); and, secondarily, that “it is at 
least probable that, where we have protective resemblance in a unicolourous 


328 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


condition, it is a survival of original assimilative colouration, and not a direct 
product of natural selection” (p. 473). The question to be considered is, 
whether these propositions have been sufficiently maintained. 

I may here state that, so far as concerns the endeavours of some biolo- 
gists to make natural selection responsible for every trifling detail of colour, 
I can sympathise to some extent with Mr. Distant’s general attitude ; as, 
for instance, when it is attempted to explain trivial local variations by the 
purely hypothetical and quite unprovable assumption that these are corre- 
lated with certain obscure but useful constitutional characters, of which we 
know nothing at all, on the ground that it is these characters, and not the 
trivial colours themselves, that have been operated upon by natural selection. 
Such contentions certainly do not commend themselve in the present state 
of our knowledge. But when one contemplates the vast mass of valuable biolo- 
gical work, both in arduous experiments and paisntaking observations, that has 
been and is still being accomplished by the champions of natural selection 
in order to test the validity of the Darwinian theory in every hole and corner 
of the organic world, one can only read with unfeigned astonishment the 
assertion that ‘‘ the tendency to explain all problems by natural selection 
is to-day greatly retarding the study of bionomics. It is not one whit re- 
moved from the proferred explanation of the old teleologists, and represents 
as little thinking’! An endeavour to refute this assertion would be out of 
place here; and I need only mention, with special reference to the last 
phrase of the above quotation, that although the explanation on the selection 
theory of the inter-resemblance of distasteful insects appears simple enough 
at the present day, yet for twenty years it baffled the ingenuity of such 
men as Bates and Wallace, until Fritz Miller put forward the ingenious 
theory of mimicry now associated with his name.* 

But to return to Mr. Distant’s suggestions. We are at once confronted 
with a difficulty in that no definition is offered of the exact significance of 
the term ‘‘ assimilative colouration,” which is evidently loosely applied, see- 
ing, for example, that the brilliant red on the wings of the African Touracos 
is given as an instance of partial assimilative colouration (p. 460), + appa- 
rently on the assumption that these birds eat copper {—the common copper 


* Of course Mr. Marshall does not suggest that Miiller’s theory has found 
universal acceptance ?—EDp. 

|} The exact passage to which exception is taken reads as follows: ‘‘ This 
cannot be taken as an instance of pure, but only partial, assimilative colour- 
ation, but is sufficient to prove that colour may be largely derived from the 
mineral constituents of the earth’s surface, and in this way can scarcely be 
altogether ascribed to the action of ‘natural selection.’”’—Ep. 

| The ‘assumption that these birds eat copper” is not found on the page 
criticised ; and is negatived by a quotation given from Mr. Monteiro (p. 459), 


—ED, 


NOTES AND QUERIES 329 


ores of the country being green. We must, therefore, assume that assimi- 
lative colouration, as here understood, signifies a close similarity of colour- 
ing between an organism and its environment, due to the direct action of 
the latter upon the organism, either through nerve stimuli or through the 
direct absorption of the environment into its system, such colouring being 
essentially non-significant, any utility it may possess being entirely fortuitous. 

The general proposition that in the earliest ages of the earth’s history 
such assimilative colouration everywhere prevailed is a perfectly legitimate 
surmise, though a mere surmise it must ever remain. But, on the other 
hand, while even the most advanced selectionists will doubtless allow that 

the earliest organic colour, or colours, were probably non-significant, they 

would be quite justified in opposing the hypothesis of assimilation, as above 
defined, on the ground that there is no reason whatever to suppose that 
the direct action of any environment upon an organism must necessarily 
produce in it a colouration identical with that of its environment; and 
Mr. Distant’s own examples might be cited in support of this contention, 
@. Ys that a diet of hemp-seed turns Bullfinches black; that red and. yellow 
feathers are produced in certain Green Parrots by feeding them on fish; 
that the feathers of Cotinga can be transformed from purple to brilliant red 
by the application of heat, and so forth—in ail of which instances there is 
no colour similarity between the various causes and their effects ;* and still 
further experimental evidence might be adduced. Indeed, when we con- 
sider the numerous instances of non-significant colours known to us both in 
the organic and inorganic worlds, there can be no reasonable objection to 
the hypothesis that the earliest organisms might have developed, through 
purely physico-chemical causes, non-significant colours, both brilliant and 
otherwise, which might, or might not, have corresponded with those of their 
respective environments; and thus, when natural selection did become a 
vera causa, there would already have been a considerable range of colour 
upon which it might operate. However, with regard to the first appearance 
of this factor, it seems more reasonable to suppose that this was practically 
synchronous with the first appearance of organic life, though the struggle 
for existence at that period would be solely against the physical forces of 
nature, and thus natural selection would then have little or no effect upon 
colouration, except perhaps indirectly. 

Supposing, however, that, for the sake of argument, we agree to accept 
Mr. Distant’s general suggestion, we have yet to consider the correctness of 
his corollary thereto, which is really the essential portion of his paper. Ac- 
cording to this view: ‘‘If the earliest forms of life are to be sought only in 


** These examples were prefaced in the article criticized by the remark: 
“The view of a direct action caused by a constant food on animal colouration 
has frequently been remarked.’’—Ep, 


330 j THE ZOOLOGIST. 


an ancient geological record, it is also in that phase of animal existence 
that the beginnings of colouration must have developed. It therefore 
seems possible that assimilative colouration may have been a first and a 
very general consequent in animal development; and that the subsequent 
protective resemblance acquired by numerous living creatures through the 
process of natural selection, when life had advanced to the competitive 
stage, is far too frequently used as an explanation for whole series of | 
uniform phenomena in colouration, which have probably survived unaltered 
from remote antiquity.” (Pp. 383, 384.) And again: “ As adaptation im- 
plies a previous state of variation, which again predicates a more or less stable 
condition from which variation arose, we come to the conclusion that the 
pre-variable condition was a unicolorous one, and from the data—scanty 
indeed—at our disposal, are inclined to suggest that the unicolorous hue 
was originally due to assimilative colouration.” (P. 471.) In other words, 
it is suggested that the present unicolorous hues of such organisms as green 
birds and caterpillars, isabelline desert animals and flat fishes, &c., are pre- 
ferably to be explained on the ground that they are survivals of an assimi- 
lative colouring which was acquired in early geological times, its persistence 
being due not to the direct action of natural selection, but to the fact that 
this colouring happened, quite by chance, to be of vital importance to the 
animals.* 

Now, apart from other objections, the acceptance of such an hypothesis 
appears to me to land us at once upon the horns of a dilemma. Hither we 
have to believe that these unicolorous animals have existed as we now see 
them since the “ early stages of animal life,” or we have to assume that these 
organisms, with their numerous ancestry, right back to the low generalised 
form from which they sprung in “remote antiquity,” must have existed 
through countless ages of time and innumerable geological and climatic 
changes in an unchanging environment to which their primeval assi- 
milative colouring chanced to be so well adapted, that natural selection 
has been quite unable to affect them in that respect throughout the entire 
period ; although, be it noted, their structure has undoubtedly undergone, 
in most cases, very considerable modification. 

This conclusion is to me almost as untenable as the previous one; and, 
as it is difficult to perceive in what other way the present phenomena of 
colour can be explained upon the suggestion of the survival of ancestral 
assimilative colouring, it seems to me that this hypothesis must fall to the 
ground. The fundamental error of the suggestion appears to lie in the fact 
that the development of colour has been regarded in a purely abstract light, 
and not in connection with the development of any particular animal or group 
of animals, as must be done in order to arrive at any reliable results. 


* The inference, ‘‘ quite by chance to be of vital importance to the 
animals,’ is not to be found in the pages criticized.—Ep. 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 331 


It must be particularly pointed out that in Mr. Distant’s general 
discussion of the subject he has most clearly suggested that the present 
day colouring, which is classed by him as assimilative (in opposition 
to adaptive) was only developed in the earliest geological epochs, and 
prior to the first appearance of natural selection as an efficient factor— 
according to his conception of that first appearance. Fortunately we are 
able to obtain, from certain passages, some idea as to this conception, for 
with regard to the Lias formation of the Jurassic Period (Mesozoic), when 
the gigantic Enaliosaurians abounded, it is freely admitted that “ Here we 
see natural selection, with its iron and implacable rule, a real factor’’;* 
and, further, in the later essays on ‘‘ Mimicry,” good cause is shown for 
the recognition of the occurrence of natural selection so far back as the 
Carboniferous Period in Paleozoic times. 

But when we come to consider the examples adduced in support of the 
above suggestion, we at once find that the fundamental proposition is 
practically disregarded. A single instance will suffice. Referring to the 
colouring of primitive man, it is remarked that: “Their colour would 
have been uniform, either derived from their more brutish ancestors, or, 
possibly, a more assimilative colouration may have ensued to the soil on 
which they walked.”+ It will be thus seen that the vast majority of 


* This quotation with its context is as follows :—‘‘ Thus, after a period 
of animal evolution which may be computed by millions of years, and in 
which fish abounded, perhaps not yet altogether under a severe stress of 
selection and survival, the Mesozoic period arrives, when, in the words of 
Oscar Schmidt, ‘the Placoids and Ganoids, hitherto predominating in the 
ocean almost without a foe, now found overwhelming enemies in the true 
Sea-lizards or Enaliosaurians, especially the Ichthyosaura and Plesiosauria.’ 
Here we see natural selection, with its iron and implacable rule, a real factor 
in the lives and development of these creatures, connected and increasing 
with an advancing animal evolution, but still only a term to express the 
modifying influences incidental to a struggle for existence” (pp. 3888-9).— Eb. 

+ Quotations are best unabridged. The following is as printed :—‘“ As 
De Quatrefages has remarked, ‘The first men who peopled the centre of 
human appearance must at first have differed from each other only in 
individual features.’ Their colour would have been uniform, either derived 
from their more brutish ancestors, or possibly, as their habits became less 
arboreal, a more assimilative colouration may have ensued to the soil on 
which they walked ”’ (p. 403).—Ep. 

A previous paragraph, not quoted, reads: ‘‘ But although facts may be 
found to support new suggestions, such as a possible original assimilative 
colouration of man, the quest for such produces other recorded observations, 
which, though not altogether contradictory to the view, still point to other 
causes, support other conclusions, and reassert the problem we seek to solve”’ 
(p. 400).—Ep, 


332 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


instances cited by Mr. Distant are quite inappropriate as illustrations of 
his fundamental suggestions, though possibly they might be brought 
forward in support of a theory that assimilative colouration has been 
sporadically developed from recent geological times down to the present day. 

On glancing through the quotations given, one is at once struck by the 
practically complete absence of anything in the way of experimental evidence 
as to the direct action of the environment, and this is the more strange 
seeing that such evidence is actually available. It will be sufficient to refer 
to the splendid series of exhaustive experiments made by Prof. Poulton 
upon the influence of both food and surrounding colours on the larve and 
pupe of various Lepidoptera. These experiments have been carried out 
with the most scrupulous care and exactitude, and the conclusions which 
can be drawn from them are worth scores of hasty observations and 
occasionally inaccurate generalizations made by travellers and sportsmen. 
It would be beside the point to enter into details as to the results obtained 
by Prof. Poulton, since we are only discussing the possibility of the 
survival of primeval assimilation; but it may be mentioned that these 
experiments definitely prove that certain of these organisms possess, in 
varying degrees, the capacity of being modified in colour by the direct 
action of different light-waves; and, further, I consider it is sufficiently 
demonstrated that this capacity can only be satisfactorily explained by the 
theory of natural selection, and not by any theory of purely internal or 
external causes. 

But to resume: with reference to the attempt to explain the crimson 
colour in the wings of the African Touracos (Turacus and Gallirea) as 
being due to the occurrence of copper,in the districts which they frequent, 
I quite agree with the objections raised by Dr. Bowdler Sharpe.* In my 
experience of these beautiful birds, both in Natal and Mashonaland, I can 
find no connection between their distribution and the occurrence of coppers ; 
and besides, the fact, noted by Mr. Distant, that they have been known to 
moult several times in captivity in England without impairing the brilliancy 
of their feathers, appears to entirely negative any such direct connection. 
Moreover, no attempt is made tu explain why it is only these birds which 
are affected in this curious way; or why, in them, the effects are confined 
to a limited number of feathers. | 

It is noticeable that wherever phenomeua are explained upon the theory 
of natural selection a detailed explanation of the ‘“ why and wherefore ” is 
always expected, whereas exponents of theories of purely environmental 
causes are so frequently content to confine themselves to the widest of 
generalities. 


* Dr. Sharpe’s objections are given on the page criticized, and given as 
a qualitative contradiction,—Ep, 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 333 


Among the instances quoted by Mr. Distant as bearing on the suggestion 
that “Even the obscure problem of the colouration of mankind may have 
originally—and before migration became such an important factor in 
modification—been due to a more or less assimilative colouration,” are 
some remarks (p. 398) on the natives of Mashonaland from a paper by the 
late Mr. W. Eckersley, whose acquaintance I made when he visited this 
country seven years ago. In one portion of his paper Mr. Eckersley 
states that ‘large areas of red soil are frequently met with”; in quite 
another part he mentions that the colour of the Mashonas is “ dark 
chocolate-brown, some shades removed from black.” As a matter of fact, 
the absolute proportion of red soil in Mashonaland is comparatively small, 
and, moreover, the vast majority of the Kafirs live on the huge outcrops of 
granite which constitute the great bulk of the plateau. But, quite apart 
from this, any argument for the hypothesis of assimilative colouration, 
based on the relation of the Mashonas, or indeed any of the Bantu tribes, 
to the soil they now inhabit, is entirely vitiated by the fact that we know 
that these tribes have come down from the North comparatively recently, 
and some of their migrations, at least, have taken place within historic 
times.* I certainly cannot agree with Mr. Distant’s somewhat sweeping 
assertion that ‘‘the colour of mankind can in no sense come under the 
explanations of protective or aggressive resemblance ..... or nuptial 
colouration.” Any one who has seen a Kafir in his native bush must have 
been struck by his inconspicuousness as compared with a white man, and 
there can be little doubt that this assimilation to his surroundings must be 
of considerable value for aggressive purposes (as, for instance, in stalking 
game which might frequently be of vital importance); further, Darwin 
himself has argued (‘ Descent of Man,’ ed. 2, p. 604) that racial colouring 
may be to some extent due to sexual selection. 

Unfortunately, suggestions of the type referred to above are only too 
easily made, and might readily be multiplied with a little ingenuity. For 
instance, we might suggest that, as swallows are eminently aérial birds, the 
great predominance of blue in their colouring is due to continual exposure 
to the blue sky, and we might seek for confirmation of this in the fact that 
the blue colour is principally found on the upper surface, which is most 
exposed to this influence; and, finally, we should pass over in silence the 
little difficulty as to the colouring of the Swifts. 


** Mr. Marshall does not seem to have read a passage which might have 
mollified his strictures :—‘ It is true that assimilative colouration seems to 
have little modified the colour of indigenous races, even in Africa, if we take 
a comprehensive view of the whole area. But we must not forget that men 
have so often migrated from their original birthplaces, and, more than that, 
much mixture has taken place’’ (p. 399).—-Ep. 


334 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Finally, I must mention the notes on the colouration of the Cat tribe. 
After referring to Darwin’s remarks on the stripes occurring on young 
Lions, and also to Steedman’s observation that these markings are likewise 
foetal (p. 462), Mr. Distant proceeds to say.: ‘‘ It seems more in consonance 
with present knowledge and opinion to consider that spots, though primitive, 
were not original, and succeeded, not preceded, unicolorous ornamentation, 
which has survived only where it has been more or less in unison with the 
creature’s environment, and so afforded aggressive protection, as in the case 
of the Lion” (p. 464). Seeing that the foetal markings distinctly prove that, 
at least, the immediate ancestors of the Lion were striped animals, and that 
_ therefore its present unicolorous coat must have been subsequently acquired, 
it is certainly difficnlt to understand how this animal can be adduced as a 
survival of a supposed primitive assimilative colouration ! * 

In conclusion, I can only regret that my notes on Mr. Distant’s paper 
have been perforce entirely critical. Although I, as a selectionist, cannot 
regard as sound the suggestions which he puts forward, I can still 
appreciate their value in drawing attention to these interesting topics. 
And I trust that some reader of the ‘ Zoologist,’ more competent to discuss 
these matters than myself, will in turn point out any errors that may exist 
in my own arguments and contentions; for it is only by healthy discussion, 
followed by more careful observation and experiment, that we can hope to 
attain a true insight into those large biological problems, the solution of 
which is the ultimate aim of all natural science. — Guy A. K. MarsHauu 
(Salisbury, Mashonaland). 


* On page 462, the writer of these suggestions, which Mr. Marshall is 
criticizing, actually states: ‘‘A fact, however, which very strongly stands 
against the view of original assimilative colouration here assumed, is found 
in the markings of the young of all the unicolorous Cats—Lion, Puma, &¢.— 
which are more or less indistinctly spotted or striped; and as many allied . 
species, both young and old, are similarly marked, Darwin has observed that 
‘no believer in evolution will doubt that the progenitor of the Lion and Puma 
was a striped animal, and that the young have retained vestiges of the 
stripes, like the kittens of black Cats, which are not in the least striped when 
grown up... . . Taking the cases of the Lion, Puma, and Cheetah, we see 
that the two first, unicolorous in their adult stage, apparently show by their 
spotted young a derivation from a similarly coloured ancestor, whilst the 
spotted Cheetah, from the apparent evidence of its unicolorous young, would 
point to a totally different conclusion” (p. 463).—Ep. 


( 335 ) 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


The Birds of Surrey. By Joun A. Bucxniuy, M.A. 
R. H. Porter. 


SurRReEy, to the regret of many of its residents and of all its 
naturalists, is, to use the words of Mr. Bucknill, rapidly ‘‘ de- 
generating into a colossal suburb.” ‘To those who were born in 
the county, and have passed their lives there, the truth of this 
saying is painfully apparent, and the success of the “ City man”’ 
now too often means the disfigurement of the Surrey hills. The 
hand of the builder has falien very heavily on this lovely county, 
residential estates are being opened out, and many of the rarer 
birds vanishing from its boundaries. The fere nature are 
receiving notices to quit. The preservation of game in this 
county seems too often designed to afford a London holiday, and 
the keeper decides what members of our fauna shall be extermi- 
nated in the supposed interests of his employers. 

We are very thankful for this book, which gives the census of 
to-day ; what it will be reduced to in another fifty years no man 
knoweth! Even now many of the rarer birds are confined to 
restricted haunts which may not be mentioned, and the writer of 
this notice only last May watched the Stone-Curlew within an 
hour’s walk of the busy town of Croydon. ‘The Magpie is sadly 
becoming less known every year, and villagers in many parts will 
tell you how they could always procure a nest, if wanted, with 
little trouble some years back. Now a solitary appearance is, in 
many parts of Surrey, quite an event. The Jay still survives the 
persecution of the keeper, and is probably in many woods much 
more abundant than is generally supposed. The Sparrow-Hawk 
is considered by Mr. Bucknill as ‘undoubtedly decreasing,” 
though this year its visits to a poultry-yard at Warlingham on 
more than one occasion has proved that it does not restrict itself 
solely to the game-preserves around. 

The writer has compiled with care, and, we are gratified to 


336 THE ZOOLOGIST, 


see, largely from these pages. Much, however, is still to be 
learned about the birds of Surrey. Many considerable areas and 
little visited spots have not been sufficiently patrolled by the 
intelligent or judicious collector, whose operations for good or 
evil ? have now been considerably curtailed by the legislature, 
and whose reputed powers of mischief on our avifauna, even in 
the cause of science, cannot be compared with the ignorant and 
ruthless destruction by the keeper, or the diabolical injury done 
by village bird-nesting urchins. But in an era of amiable fads 
and crotchets the British zoologist must lay low, and do good by 
stealth. In the coming years our records will be more of species 
supposed to have been seen than of those actually handled and 
correctly identified. The recent apotheosis of the Sparrow is an 
illustration of what may occur. 

‘The Birds of Surrey’ should find a place in most county 
homes, but we were a little surprised to find no reference in the 
bibliography to the late Alfred Smee’s ‘My Garden,’ which refers 
to the parish of Beddington and the river Wandle, and contains 
an interesting list of birds found in that section of the county. 


The Birds of Cheshire. By 'T. A. Cowarp and CHARLES 
OupHam. Manchester: Sherratt & Hughes. 


ANOTHER county has now had its ornithological fauna de- 
scribed, and it is singular that Cheshire has had to wait so long, 
though we read that “ornithology has found but few votaries 
among Cheshire naturalists’; and again, that, ‘‘ compared with 
many other English counties, Cheshire has a remarkably poor 
avifauna.” One hundred and ten species breed or bred until 
recent years within the county boundaries, but it is among the 
casual visitors rather than the residents that the deficiency is 
apparent. 

‘The authors have, however, produced a volume which will not 
only be of value to all lovers of birds in Cheshire, but will afford 
interesting reading to that ever-increasing body, the intelligent 
students of British natural history. In fact, such books as these, 
which freely enter country houses, must do much to foster a love 
of nature in circles where more scientific zoology is taboo. Among 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 337 


_ vertebrates, birds hold the same position as the Lepidoptera in 
_ the invertebrates ; they are ever popular, and evidently appeal to 
_ the esthetic sense. In any smoking-room men can be found 
who can say something about birds, while other animals, save 
such as appertain to sport, are too often distinctly caviare. We 
may therefore be thankful to ornithologists for always keeping 
their lamps trimmed, and sustaining a general interest in zoology. 

One seldom reads a county book on birds without meeting 
with new or little-known facts, and this publication is no.excep- 
tion. Thus we are told that our old friend Corvus frugilegus 
often exhibits a preference for a particular tree in a rookery. 
“At Wythenshawe, Mr. J. J. Cash has counted forty nests in a 
single sycamore, which comes into leaf earlier than the surrounding 
elms and beeches.” 

The volume is embellished with six photogravure illustra- 
tions, and a map of the county. 


| Nature in Downland. By W.H. Hupson. Longmans, 
Green & Co. 


Tuis book may be described as a charming reverie on the 
Sussex downs by a naturalist. These bracing and rolling high- 
lands are appreciated by two classes of visitors—the artist and 
the naturalist. The first absorbs the wild and somewhat mono- 
tonous scenery, and returns with a landscape engraven on his 
heart; the second patiently endeavours to read Nature’s hiero- 
glyphics, and to many, probably, appears as a lone and strange 
creature, like the local shepherd. Jefferies was the apostle of this 
method, and has evidently founded a school of thought which 
writes in prose what some of the older poets felt and sang in 
verse. But we shall never receive in print the deepest thoughts 
that Nature sometimes imparts; these things are fugitive, and 
never written. It is only a legend that the finest impressions of 
humanity may be found in books; the individual who might 
wish to print what should be unutterable is certainly outside the 
musings of the Sphinx. After all, the naturalist can only record 
facts; of his impressions he knoweth not whither they come 
or go. We would all gladly recall, if we could, some of these 


mysterious whisperings, but the quest is too often futile. 
Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., July, 1900. 2A 


338 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Mr. Hudson has wandered over these downs with his acquired 
natural history knowledge, an open mind, and his field-glass. He 
has described much of what he saw, and a good deal of what he 
thought ,and he has regarded Nature through his own spectacles, 
and introduced remarkably little of other people’s theories. Con- 
sequently he has produced a most readable book, the style of 
which is in unison with the quiet and lorn country which he 
writes about. 

We read that the Long-eared Owl frequented, ‘‘ and probably 
bred, in the thorn, holly, and furze-patches among the South 
Downs until recently’’; and he refers to what in humanity has 
been called ‘‘ pre-natal suggestion,’ as exhibited in a lamb with 
an Owl-like face, which lived for a few days only. He also gives 
Some quite startling facts as to the quantity of Wheatears 
formerly destroyed by the shepherds at the instigation and 
remuneration of the poulterers, and truly observes :—“ It is not 
fair that it should be killed merely to enable London stock- 
brokers, sporting men, and other gorgeous persons who visit the 
coast, accompanied by ladies with yellow hair, to feed every day 
on ‘Ortolans’ at the big Brighton hotels.” Ultra advocates of 
the theory of mimicry will find some remarks worthy of con- 
sideration respecting the Common Snail (Helix nemoralis). The 
shell of this species is on the downs mostly of one type, the 
ground colour being yellow, or yellowish white, with broad black 
longitudinal bands, and “ often startles a person by its curiously 
close resemblance to a small portion of a highly-coloured Adder’s 
coil. This chance resemblance to a dangerous creature does 
not, however, serve the Snail as a protection from his principal 
enemies—the Thrushes. Wherever there is a patch of furze, 
there you will find the ‘Thrushes’ anvil,’ usually a flint half, or 
nearly quite, buried in the soil a few feet away from the bushes, 
and all round the anvil the turf is strewn with shattered shells.” 


Recollections of my Life. By Surgeon-General Sir JosEPH 
Fayrer, Bart. William Blackwood & Sons. 
Tuts book is the narrative of a useful and successful life, 
passed for the greater, and certainly for the probationary period, 
in that administrative forcing-house where so many reputations 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 339 


have been made—British India. The author has distinct claims 
to be ranked among zoologists ; his ‘ Thanatophidia of India’ is 
the result of long, original, and valuable work on the intricate 
subject of Snake-poisoning; he was the proposer at the Council 
of the Asiatic Society for an ethnological investigation of the 
Indian races, which produced Dalton’s reports on the different 
tribes in Bengal; and he projected the idea of the Zoological 
Gardens at Calcutta, which he subsequently had the satisfaction 
of seeing fully accomplished. 

In the volume as a whole, the reader will not find very much 
distinctly zoological information, but he will meet with a most 
entertaining history of his own time, which after all is the period 
whose story we can appreciate best, for it appertains to the 
incidents belonging to our own sojourn on the planet, and of 
these we know most. There is a romance in the past, but a 
reality in our own lives, and Sir Joseph Fayrer takes us again 
over the old ground. The Indian Mutiny and the Prince of 
Wales’s visit to India are the connecting links of interest, though 
perhaps both subjects have already reached the stage of exhaustive 


~ record. 


The myth of the great Sea-serpent is again before us. The 
author had corresponded with Lieutenant Forsyth, of H.M.S. 
‘Osborne,’ relative to ‘‘a marine creature seen by the officers of 
that ship not far from Sicily.” Sir Joseph is of opinion that 
‘it can hardly be doubted that the numerous reports that we 
have had from time to time, though many of them perhaps are 
not very well authenticated, are sufficient to show that some 
undescribed gigantic ophidian or sea creature still remains to be 
identified.” 

We are sorry to see at p. 59 a reference to the Toucan in 
India. The Hornbill there is generally so called, but the mistake 
should never be printed. 


340 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 


In the ‘Journal of the South-Eastern Agricultural College,’ Wye, Kent, 
No. 9, issued in April last, Mr. F. V. Theobald has contributed an instruc- 
tive article on “‘ Diseases caused by Horse Worms and their Treatment.” 
The following appear to be the major pests to the Horse :— 

Amongst insects the Horse has several foes, including four species of 
Bot Flies. One of these flies, so far unidentified, forms warbles or tumours 
under the skin, like the Ox Warble. Probably this is Hypoderma silenus, 
but it is by no means common in this country ; Mr. Theobald only remem- 
bers having seen one Horse attacked by it. The other Warble Flies live 
as parasites in their larval state inside the stomach and intestines (Gastro- 
philus equi, G. hemorrhoidalis, and G. nasalis), where the bots cause annoy- 
ance and loss of condition, but seldom death. Lice of three species also 
annoy Horses turned out to grass, namely, the piercing-mouthed Hemato- 
pinus macrocephalus, or the Large Horse Louse, and two smaller species 
related to the Bird Lice, known as Trichodectes pilosus and T.. pubescens, the 
former being the one most frequently seen, and is one of the three causes 
of that disfiguring rubbing of the tail. Numerous Diptera, such as the Gad 
Fly (Tabanus bovinus and T. autumnalis), Brimps (Hematopoda pluvialis), 
and others, suck their blood; whilst the Forest Fly (Hippobosca equina) 
causes annoyance in a few localities by tearing the hair and irritating the 
skin generally. 

The three forms of “scab” or “ mange” are also found on the Horse, 
caused by Sarcoptes scabiet v. equi, Psoroptes communis v. equi, and 
Symbtiotes communis v. equi, mainly on weakly and ill-kept stock. 

Amongst the vermiceous pests of the Horse we find representatives of 
the three great groups: Cestoda, or Tapeworms ; Trematoda, or Flukes; and 
Nematoda, or Round Worms; but in this country the two former are rare 
and comparatively unimportant, for the loss they account for is slight. On 
the other hand, the Nematoda, or Round Worms, often are the cause of 
serious mortality, especially in young animals. 

The Tapeworms found in the Horse are Tenia perfoliata, T. mamillana, 
and 7’. plicata. All three are uncommon, and do not seem to have 
occasioned any loss, nor do they seem to cause much inconvenience to their 
host. The two first-named species live in the intestines, but 7’. plicata is 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 341 


also said to be found in the stomach. Although uncommon in this country, 
Tenié are often abundant in the Horses in Russia and Germany. Tenia 
perfoliata, the commonest species, infests the ceecum and small intestine, 
sometimes the colon. It is a small worm, seldom reaching more than two 
or three inches in length—Rudolphi records it as reaching 80 mm.; the 
head is provided with four suckers, and, like the other two species, is 
devoid of hooks; the proglottides are thick and short, and the colour 
creamy white. 

Nematodes we find in all parts of the body. This group of worms, 
which contains so many parasites, is of much importance to those interested 
in Horses and Horse-breeding in all parts of the world, for they are often 
the cause of serious epizootic attacks, occasioning very considerable loss. 
These Round Worms are particularly plentiful in the intestines of the 
Horse, where perhaps they cause the gravest functional disturbances; but 
they also invade the kidneys, eyes, blood-vessels, serous membranes, skin, 
&c. In Europe our chief pests are intestinal in habit, often causing great 
mortality in foals. The following are those which are most prejudicial to 
the health of the host, and which may be considered general equine pests :— _ 


(Sclerostomum armatum, S. rubrum, and S. tetracanthum.) 

Two species of so-called “‘ Red Worms” are well known in the Horse, 
but observations made tend to show that we have evidently three species to 
deal with, for the common Small Red Worm, usually taken to be the 
S. tetracanthum of Diesing, does not agree with the detailed description of 
that species, which Mr. Theobald has observed only twice in England. He 
has therefore proposed provisionally the name rubrum for this Small Red 
Worm, as a distinct species from the one described by Diesing. 


(Oxyuris curvula and O. mastigodes.; 

The Maw Worm (Oxyuris) is a very prevalent equine pest, but, as far as 
can be gathered, it only occasions slight functional disturbances in digestion, 
and violent burning and itching sensations in the rectum and around the 
anus. When present in large numbers the Maw Worms nevertheless cause 
emaciation, and cannot be otherwise than prejudicial to their host. 


(Ascaris megalocephala.) 

This is perhaps one of the best known worms in the Horse on account 
of its size, the female often reaching 14 in. in length, and the male from 
6 to10in. It isaspecial parasite of Horses. In colour it is yellowish 
white and rigid; the oral region is restricted off from the body, and pro- 
vided with three lips with teeth on their free margin. The ova are 
globular, and are produced by hundreds, and are passed out in the host’s 
excreta; numbers also come away with the female worms that are frequently 
passed by the Horse. 


342 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


(Filaria papillosa of Rudolphi; the F’. equina of Abildgaard.) 


Although seldom of fatal import, this Threadworm is often present in 
the peritoneal cavities of the Horse, Ass, and Mule. In one instance as 
many as would fill a basket (how large we are not told) were extracted from 
the thoracic cavity of a Horse by Menges, lungs and all being invaded. 


Two species of Spiroptera are found in Horses, living in the stomach, 
namely, Spiroptera megastoma (Rud.) and S. microstoma(Sehn), They are 
both found in the right sac of the stomach. It is not probable that the 
second species is at all common, but the former is ; neither, as far as can be 
learned, causes any serious functional disturbances; but the former, if in 
large numbers, might easily become dangerous. 


WE have received the Annual Report (1899) of the Millport Marine 
Biological Station. ‘‘The station is now in a position to supply sets of 
beautiful marine zoological specimens at moderate charges to private 
individuals, as well as to schools and other institutions. As science is now 
receiving 8o much attention in school training, it is hoped that such sets 
may ere long be possessed by every well-equipped school.” 

At the request of the Vice-Chairman, Dr. Gemmill, repeated and per- 
sistent efforts were made during last winter to fertilize the eggs of the 
Limpet (Patella vulgata, L.), and to rear the young up through all their 
stages, but without success. Fertilization of the ova was easy enough, and 
the keeping of the little brown, opaque, free-swimming larve up till the 
twelfth or fourteenth day, but at that age they invariably died off, excepting 
in the case of one culture, in which a few lived till the twenty-first day. 
From the sixth day onwards the water in the hatching-jars was found 
swarming with Infusorians, which soon devoured the unfortunate larve. 
Similarly, attempts were made, with varying success, on fertilized ova of 
crustaceans, molluscs, worms, and fishes, as well as on unknown ova 
obtained from the tow-nets. Failure, when it did occur, was doubtless 
largely due to the inability to imitate sufficiently the natural conditions of 
the sea, even by constant gentle movements in the hatching-vessels, and by 
continual circulation of pure sea-water. With the facilities at command 
many perfectly normal and healthy batches of Hchinus larve were success- 
fully hatched out, and the interesting changes in their development carefully 
watched from day to day. The young of the common Urchin (£chinus 
esculentus, L.) is a favourite with students of embryology, as its transparency 
makes it easy to follow the successive changes in structural development, 
even when alive and active. Some exceptionally good fertilizations of this 
echinoderm were obtained early in May by Dr. Thomas H. Bryce, Queen 
Margaret College, University of Glasgow, from which he has prepared 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 343 


microscopic sections, the photographs of which, taken by Dr. J. H. Teacher, 
have been made into a very valuable series of lantern slides. A finely 
mounted set of these slides has been presented to the Station by the gentle- 
men named, and by means of the lantern given by Mr. Paul Rottenburg, 
of Glasgow, they can now be used for demonstration purposes. 


Mr. W. Wetts BiapeEn has taken a specimen of the Fresh-water 
Mussel (Dreissensia polymorpha) containing a very beautiful and perfect 
pearl. This shell was found in a large colony of the species in the North 
Staffordshire Canal, near Rugeley. The pearl attached to it is almost 
spherical in shape, and has a small protuberance at one side ; it is 2 mm. 
in diameter, and is very pure in colour. This is said to be the first 
recorded instance of a pearl being found in this mollusc. The shell is 
figured in the Ann. Rep. and Trans. of the ‘“ North Staffordshire Field 
Club,” 1899-1900, vol. xxxiv. 


At Stevens’ Auction Rooms two more eggs of the Great Auk were 
recently disposed of. One—an unrecorded egg—sold for three hunared 
and fifteen guineas, and the other egg for one hundred and eighty guineas. 
They were both bought by Mr. Gardner, of Oxford Street. 


THE ‘Banffshire Journal’ of June Sth last has published a letter 
received from Mr. J. A. Harvie-Brown, relating to Elvers, Hels, and 
Smolts. The following are extracts from same :— 

It is certain Elvers are largely consumed by Brown Trout for a few 
days. Soon after that, worm becomes the deadly bait. Why? Well, 
worm in low clear water, after the run of Elvers, becomes a necessary purge 
to Trout after the Hel ‘stodge.’ At least, I believe this to be the case— 
just as grass is an occasional vomit for a Dog. 

“If Elvers are largely consumed by Brown Trout, they are also largely 
consumed by Sea-Trout, Grilse, and probably also by Smolts. What are 
known among Sea-Trout as Finnocks, at the mouths of our Hast Coast 
rivers in April, May, &c., are the Grilse of the Sea-Trout, which went down 
the previous year as Smolts, which went up as Grilse or Sea-Trout, do not 
breed, but attain a growth of up to, say, half a pound, or less, and come 
down again along with the Smolts of the Salmon. ‘Their time so far is 
known to legislators, because fishing for Finnocks is prohibited whilst the 
Salmon Smolts are descending—i.e. about 15th May. ‘The baskets of 
Sea-Trout and Finnock made in the spring months on the East Coast of 
Scotland—at Ythan, Deveron, Findhorn, &c.—are either down-run Kelts 
or unspawning Grilse of the Sea-Trout; or rapidly-grown Smolts of the 


344 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Sea-Trout; or Smolts of the Sea-Trout which have remained two years in 
the fresh-water streams, after putting on the silver. Thus we find Par 
+ 1b. weight, but Smolts in silver often three inches long only, and others 
seven inches long. These, I take it, are the young of different hatchings, 
the larger of which are the progeny of older Salmon ; the larger and smaller 
Par in the same way. 

“Now, if Brown Trout feed—‘ stodge’—on Elvers, they lie in wait for 
them, because Brown Trout are not strictly migratory; but if Smolts and 
Sea-Trout Grilse also feed largely on Elvers—as I feel sure they do—they, 
being anodromous or migratory, come down in bulk to meet the Elvers. The 
first appearance of Elvers on any reach of water (on Deveron) wakes up the 
migratory instinct at once, and, acting almost like ground-bait, sets the 
Smolts and Sea-Trout Grilse—aye, and Salmon Kelts, too—on the move 
seaward. Thence the well-known name, ‘A weel-mendit kelt.’” 


We are glad to see from ‘ The Scottish Geographical Magazine’ for 
June that it is proposed to organize and equip a Scottish National Antarctic 
Expedition, which will co-operate with the German and British expeditions 
now being fitted out, and devote its attention more especially to physical 
and biological oceanographical researches, and to geology and meteorology. 

The Scottish vessel will be one of the ordinary Norwegian or Scottish 
type of whalers of about 500 tons, 130 ft. long, and steaming seven to eight 
knots. A ship of this size will have ample accommodation for thirty-seven 
all told. The proposed staff includes six scientists and tive ships’ officers, 
and a crew of twenty-six. ‘The ship will proceed from Scotland on August 
1st, 1901, to Port Stanley, in the Falkland Islands, which will form the 
base for operations in the Antarctic regions. She will proceed southward 
by Weddell’s track in 30° W. This route has never yet been tried seriously 
with a steamer. Weddell, in 1823, penetrated far south with two sailing 
ships, one of 120 tons and one of 65 tons ; Bellinghausen also was success- 
ful a little farther eastward. oss, with sailing-ship, failed, but Larsen, 
with a steamer, reached 68° S. in about 60° W. The Dundee whalers, in 
1892 and 1893, being on commerce bound, were chiefly occupied securing 
Seals, and, since these abounded in the vicinity of the Circle, they had no 
need to go farther south. There is little doubt that the ice can be penetrated 
by such a vessel as that above mentioned. . 

Mr. William §S. Bruce will take command of the expedition with a. 
whaling captain under him and four other officers; a naturalist will be 
permanently attached to the ship, and will take charge of and carry on the 
scientific work there during the leader’s absence with the wintering party. 
The land party will land in a high latitude on the east coast of Graham’s 
Land, and the ship will return northward for the winter. 


’ 
’ 
4 
‘ 
. 


Plate IV. 


Zoologist, 1900. 


‘MGA SQOIDFTAd SANQIdYN 


i «Siva ae aie et 


aap : jer ad ‘a? 5 or. "T., *.™ 
é — 7 ad = ‘« 
; 4 A v ! i} 
»* 
; ” . ' 
. . i e 

a ( . ’ 
Ay Py at” 

¢ ifs" 

‘ 4 an WW 
‘ c t @ 
; ‘e's * tt “3 a > ee 7 
- ’ , ) Ou 
é ie ’ a 
cog) x, 5 ; 5 Mos 
- a . 9 _= 
é ° beds 
F r ae - 
- ie % 
. 

; art . 
os " eo > 
¢ ye at 

a. 
*) 
+ i y 
i 4 i< 
> y vs 7 
1 : : 
<7 » 
2 ah | 
y 
> 
* 
‘ 
s ~~ 
. 4 
s as a 
pal ‘ 
; 
. 
' 
. 


= 


Plate Vv 


ZCole JOO, 


ORME Ente ouG RANGE IN ENGLAND 
OF PANURUS BIARMI/CUS. 


West, Newman lith. 


_ THE ZOOLOGIST 
No. 710.—August, 1900. 


ZOOLOGICAL NOTES FROM SYDNEY. 


By Davin G. STEAD. 


(PiatEe LY.) 


Last year (Zool. 1899, p. 407) I had the pleasure of narrating 
one of my zoological wanderings near Sydney. On the present 
occasion I propose to describe some of the objects of interest 
which it has been my good fortune to encounter on various 
rambles during the past few months. 

At the time of writing the ‘‘ bush” is teeming with animal 
life, chiefly insects, though the Reptilia play no small a part. Of 
the former, perhaps the Cicadas attract most attention, both by 
numbers and noise. It is only a few weeks since they made their 
appearance above ground (that is, in the city and environs), but 
they have been making the most of their time ; and now the first 
thing to greet one’s ears on awaking in the morning is the sound 
of their stridulation. Hot, still, sultry weather always suits 
them best, and under such atmospheric conditions, and as the 
Season advances, they may be often heard long before daybreak, 
keeping up their “ churr-urr-urr-urr”’ until about 7 or 8 o’clock, 
when there will be a general quietude until about 11 o’clock, 
when once more the concert is resumed with renewed vigour. 
This goes on with a few intermissions until about 4 or 5 p.m., 
when once more it ceases as suddenly as it began; only to start 
again about 7 p.m., and continuing until long after darkness has 
set in. I have even heard them as late as 11 p.m. I have 

Zool, 4th ser. vol. IV., August, 1400. 2B 


346 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


spoken of the Cicadas as “‘ singing.” ‘To me it is music (though 
most people consider it a hateful sound), recalling, as it invariably 
does, so many happy hours spent in roving about the bush. But 
even I can have too much of it. I can well remember one such 
occasion. It was a glorious day, with a gentile breeze and a blue 
sky, with the air clear and bright, when I sallied forth, making 
my way to the ferry which traverses that long arm of Port 
Jackson known as Parramatta River. I soon found plenty to 
interest me, as the water was in parts almost alive with Disco- 
meduse of several species, some small transparent ones (of a 
bluish tint) floating lazily along at the surface; others (Cram- 
bessa), of a large size and fleshy-pink colour, forging along 
steadily by means of the rhythmical contractions of their ciliated 
discs ; and others, again—‘ man-o’-war blubbers’’—which espe- 
cially attracted attention on account of their beauty. These last 
are of a semi-transparent red tinge, the disc having all over its 
surface large white spots. These spots become very dense near 
the margin, the fringe being almost entirely white. (Recently— 
Feb. 4th, 1900—I observed a large number of these animals in 
Circular Quay, Port Jackson. Some of them had been greatly 
mutilated by the propellers of the many ferry-boats which ply 
from here. In one instance I observed a specimen swimming 
along serenely minus its manubrium, while in another there was 
only three-fourths of a disc, and this still contracted rhythmically.) 
From the borders of the disc depends, besides the usual short 
fringe, a large number of long white and beautiful, though 
treacherous, tentacles (these being thickly studded with lasso- 
cells). When swimming in clear water the animal possesses a 
most pleasing and beautiful appearance; but when one’s limbs 
come into contact with its tentacles, as while wading, the most 
intense and painful irritation is set up, which lasts for some 
considerable time after (as I know to my cost). 

After travelling a few miles I landed at my destination—Ryde, 
a pretty little village situated in a fruit-growing district. Several 
hollows in this locality are a great breeding-ground for three or 
four species of Cicada, notably one — Thopha saccata—a large 
species. ‘That day I heard such a tumult of insect-life as I have 
never experienced either before or since. The noise was deafening. ~ 
Some men who were near at hand, upon seeing me searching 
about amongst the stones, evidently guessed that I was on the 


— 
—" 


ZOOLOGICAL NOTES FROM SYDNEY. 347 


look-out for zoological specimens, as they drew towards me, one 
of them carrying a magnificent green glittering beetle. He had 
to come quite close and shout before I could hear him, so 
tumultuous wasthe sound. All around on the trees (Hucalyptus), 
which were here tall and slender, were to be seen scores upon 
Scores of Cicadas* in all imaginable stages—dingy sluggish larve 
that had just emerged from their holes at the foot of some tree, 
Some of them just in the act of bursting from the larva-case ; 
others, again, that had performed this act, standing or climbing 
slowly up the tree, waiting for their wings (which were hanging 
like little green globular bags full of fluid) to dry; and so on up 
to the beauteous-winged imago flying lightly from tree to tree. 
In dealing with these insects one cannot fail to notice the habit 
they have of spurting an acrid fluid as they fly off on being 
alarmed ; this they eject with some degree of force, and in con- 
siderable quantity. 

My attention was here attracted by the great number of large 
handsome red-and-black Hymenoptera (Eweirus sp. ?), which 
were attacking the Cicadas, relentlessly pursuing them from tree 
to tree. (Afterwards, on my road home, I came across a speci- 
men of this large Wasp, hard at work dragging a large green and 
apparently anesthetized Cicada across my pathway. Unthink- 
ingly I separated them, for which I was immediately sorry, as I 
might have witnessed the performance of stowing the Cicada away 
in some hole for the use of its assailant’s future progeny.) 

Here also I observed large numbers of the Coleoptera known 
as “ HKlephant insects” (Curculionide) of two varieties, one of a 
uniform dark colour, and the other black and green, both kinds 
(Chrysolopus spectabilis, Fabry.) being on the branches of a large 
wattle-tree (Acacia). These wattle-trees are usually swarming 
with insects, notably Ants, on account of the large amount of 
gum which is exuded, especially from where there has been a 
wound. Here the vibration set up in the air by the Cicadas 
became so intense and so intolerable that I took to my heels, and 
made for the beach, so that I might gain a brief respite. 

* These consisted chiefly of five species :—Thopha saccata, Psaltoda 
merens, Cicada angularis, Tibicen curvicosta (this makes a tremendous 
noise, and can be heard at a great distance, though it is not very large), and, 
lastly, Cyclochila australasie, of which there are two varieties, one a beau- 
tiful green, the other yellow, with intermediate forms. op 2 


348 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


All along the shore were numbers of boulders which had been 
perforated through and through by the little Isopod crustacean 
Spheroma, assisted here and there by a boring mollusc. These 
little creatures form a very powerful factor in the disintegration 
of the rocks, as, after they have driven their galleries through, it 
is quite an easy matter for the sea to do the rest. As com- 
mensals in the burrows of these Isopods, I have observed many 
other small crustaceans, several species of small fishes, including 
the Common Eel (Anguilla australis), and also a brown-coloured 
Araneid. This last—of which individuals were numerous— 
remains in the burrows even when the tide rises and floods them, 
and it may be seen moving about beneath the surface clothed in 
a tunic of air-bubbles. 

While speaking of the seashore, I must mention something 
connected therewith which at once claims the naturalist’s atten- 
tion, and that is the zones which each animal (or set of animals) 
occupies. Taking a typical flat, and starting from the top, we 
would first come to a sandy zone, slightly above high water. 
This is inhabited by the beautiful “ Swift-footed Crab” (Ocypoda 
cordimana), a small grey Isopod; and, in the event of there being 
decaying animal or vegetable matter, many specimens of the 
Common Sandhopper (Talorchestia quadrimana). Then, lower 
down, there is a zone just lapped at high water, about which are 
strewn clean stones (i.e. stones not overgrown with Algz). 
Under these stones are to be found many interesting and exceed- 
ingly agile Crabs (Cyclograpsus Lavauxi). Going still lower, we 
come to a belt consisting of a mixture of sand and mud. On— 
or rather in—this we find the bright-coloured, martial-looking 
“Soldier Crab” (Mycteris longicarpus),* and an exceedingly 
fragile Callianassa. Going beyond this again, we arrive at a 
zone which is only just above low-tide mark. This is composed 
of dark evil-smelling mud, with occasionally small Algs-covered 
boulders strewn sparsely over its surface. On the stones them- 
selves (amongst the Alge) we find some tiny Crabs (Hymenosoma 
varium and Porcellana dispar), Underneath will be found others 
and larger species, viz. Chasmagnathus levis, Sesarma erythro- 
dactyla, and occasionally Pilumnopeus serratifrons. In the mud 

* For further information regarding these crustaceans, cf. author’s 


‘* Notes on the Habits of some of the Australian Malacostracous Crustacea ”’ 
(Zool. May, 1898). = 


ZOOLOGICAL NOTES FROM SYDNEY. 349 


itself are two species: Helecius cordiformis and Macrophthalmus 
setosus ; besides several kinds of Annelida. The last-mentioned 
Crab—Pilumnopeus serratifrons—I have found, is occasionally 
attacked by a parasite—Sacculina.* The parasitized Crabs 
which I examined were found to represent both sexes in about 
equal proportions, ‘and neither the pleons nor the abdominal 
appendages were affected in either sex; a different state of things 
to that recorded by Prof. A. Giard in the case of certain European 
Crabst attacked in a somewhat similar manner; and also by 
Prof. W. Haswell in that of an Australian species—Nectocar- 
cinus integrifrons.} 

I have spoken of Ryde as being in a fruit-growing district, 
which reminds me of the Fruit-Bats (Pteropus poliocephalus). 
These are perhaps the orchard’s greatest enemies. The fruit- 
growers of the north-western suburbs of Sydney (of which Ryde 
is one) have annually large quantities of fruit destroyed by these 
“Flying Foxes,” which congregate in immense numbers during 
the fruit season (the present time). After a night’s ravaging 
they mass in great numbers in the heavy timber of the surround- 
ing bush, and may be seen hanging thickly, almost like Bees, from 
the tree-branches. A war of extermination is waged against 
them periodically by bodies of fruit-growers. Recently, in pur- 
suance of that custom, a party of fifty-three fruit-growers from 
the surrounding districts drove to a known camp of the pest, 
carrying with them 5000 cartridges. The number of “ Flying 
Foxes” was estimated to be between 100,000 and 120,000. A 
successful raid was made upon the ‘‘camp,” resulting in the 
destruction of about 2750 animals. Im another district one 
hundred miles north of Sydney, at a recent batiue, twenty men 
killed 13,000 of the same animal, which proves what a serious 
pest this Pteropus is to the orchards ; as, for every peach, necta- 
rine, or plum that the “ Flying Fox” bites, it knocks down at 
least a dozen. 

On two occasions recently we have had, on the coast of New 
South Wales, the most unusual phenomenon of a dust-storm at 


* Cf. my ‘Contributions to a Knowledge of the Australian Crustacean 
Fauna. No. 2. On Sacculina parasitic upon Pilwmnopeus serratifrons”’ 
(P. L.8., N.S. W., part iv. 1899). 

+ Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (5), vol. xix. pp. 325-345, 1881, 

t P.L.5S., N.S. W. (2), vol, ii, 1888, 


350 | THE ZOOLOGIST. 


sea. A steamer on the way from Queensland to Sydney had a 
peculiar experience on the passage down the coast. After leaving 
Brisbane, and when crossing Moreton Bay, a thick haze was 
encountered, which made the atmosphere so dense that it was 
impossible to discern the leading lights. In consequence the 
vessel had to anchor from midnight till 5.30 a.m., when she 
passed out of the bay, the buoys in the channel being made out 
with difficulty, even though it was daylight. This continued for 
some distance down the coast. When the boat emerged from 
the thick weather everything (including the passengers’ quarters 
and fittings) was covered with a fine red dust which had been 
carried out to sea by the strong westerly wind then blowing off the 
land. (Apropos of this, lam informed by Capt. Waller, who travels 
between New Zealand and this port, and to whom I am indebted 
for some interesting specimens which I hope to mention on some 
future occasion, that he has encountered moths and other insects 
whilst quite out of sight of the land, at a distance of from seventy 
to eighty miles from the New South Wales coast.) The red dust, 
upon undergoing a microscopical examination, was resolved into 
the remains of innumerable Diatomacee, a fact interesting alike 
to the zoologist and botanist. 

While walking along the beach at Maroubra Bay (a few miles 
from Sydney), on an excursion some time ago, my attention 
was suddenly riveted by a very curious-looking object. ‘This 
on close examination proved to be the fruit of Barringtonia 
cupania, which had evidently been in the water for some con- 
siderable time, as it was covered with stalked barnacles (Lepas 
pectinata?), some of which were apparently full-grown. Upon 
its surface was also a species of Bryozoa. In one corner a hole 
had been excavated (whether by its occupant or not, I am 
ignorant), and safely ensconced in it was the small and widely 
distributed ‘‘ Gulf-weed Crab,” Nautilograpsus minutus. (For 
those readers who are not familiar with this branch of zoology, 
I may add that this famous little crustacean is believed, with 
good reason, to be the one which Columbus found on the 
floating ‘‘ Sargasso Weed,”’ and which caused him, fallaciously, 
to surmise that his ships were near land, However, it is perhaps 
almost needless to say that this was no proof, as the animal is 
found in nearly all the tropical and temperate seas of the globe 
upon floating seaweed and wood.) In the same cavity as the 


ZOOLOGICAL NOTES FROM SYDNEY. 351 


Crab was a small “Sea-Mouse” ; also in parts, where the husk 

__ was beginning to disintegrate, were several small brownish-black 
Amphipoda. The discovery of this current-borne Barringtonia 
is not by any means a unique one, though perhaps the finding of 
‘So many tenants is, as cocoa-nuts and other objects of in- 

terest are continually being found along our coast, which have 
been brought from the same far-distant source—the South Sea 
Islands. I have many times collected, at different points along 
the coast of New South Wales, small pieces of pumice and 
volcani¢e cinders. These have been continually washed up for a 
considerable number of years at least, as is amply borne out by 
the fact that they are found deep down in the grass-grown sand- 
dunes, whenever an opening is made (artificially or otherwise). 
The most interesting thing to the zoologist is that this flotsam 
carries with it occasionally—as I can personally bear witness— 
such animals as tubicolous annelids, and sometimes small speci- 
mens of coral. It is almost impossible to conceive what vast 
changes might be wrought, or what additions might be made, to 
the fauna or flora of an island lying in the course of the current 
which carries along this flotsam. 

While on this subject I might mention some other ways by 
which Polynesian animals are transported to our waters. It will 
at once be self-evident that ships’ bottoms are a very fertile agency, 
as there is a large amount of trade between this port and the islands 
of the South Pacific. Thus it is not very hard to understand 
how it is that fairly large specimens of Madrepores should have 
been found growing in Port Jackson, where they were certainly 
not pre-existent. Now, turning to the land-animals: our imports 
from the South Seas consist mainly of copra, pine-apples, bananas, 
cocoa-nuts, palm-leaf fans, hats, and native matting, and each of 
these brings along its quota of migrants. I had at one time 
brought to me a prettily marked Snake, alive, which was curled 
up in a bunch of bananas, and others have occasionally been 
found. But the three last-mentioned articles should perhaps 
claim priority for the number of Arthropoda—in the way of Cock- 
roaches, Spiders, Centipedes, small Coleoptera, &c.—which they 
bring. On the other hand, I have reason to believe that many 
animals have been introduced from this country into the islands 
by means of the same agency—the ships. 

During last year (1899), on several of my excursions round 


352 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


about Sydney, in walking over the heights, I was much struck by 
the curious appearance of the rocks (sandstone), whick were in 
many cases completely honeycombed. As I am always exceed- 
ingly inquisitive about holes, I determined to “‘ get to the bottom” 
of the cause. Upon making enquiries amongst my naturalist 
friends, I found that many others had noticed it, and it had been 
the subject of a considerable amount of controversy. Most 
seemed to favour the hypothesis that it was the work of 
Wasps, but a few clung to the view that it was done by the 
Termites. After a considerable amount of labour, I found that 
the tunnelling was the work of the latter insects, as I found them 


“HAWKESBURY SANDSTO 
TUNNELLED BY TERMI TES, 
sere SYDNEY, N. GoW. 


an situ and at work.* It would seem almost incredible that 
these little frail-looking creatures should accomplish such work 
as this, were it not for the fact that their depredations in houses, 
&c., are so well known. It was only quite recently that the 
weighty and apparently solid roof of the Australian Museum at 
Sydney was found to be in places completely honeycombed by 
these insects. In the course of their work they had actually 
bored through sheet-lead an eighth of an inch in thickness. Had 
the roof collapsed there would have resulted irreparable damage. 
The holes in the before-mentioned sandstone are beautifully 
uniform in size, are of great symmetry, and are lined in the 


* P.L.8., N.S. W., part iii. p. 418, 1899. 


ZOOLOGICAL NOTES FROM SYDNEY. 353 


manner so characteristic of the Termites. While speaking of 
excavations, it might not be amiss to mention another instance. 
One day I was out in the vicinity of Curl Curl (near Sydney), 


_ when I suddenly observed half-way up the stem of a young 


eucalypt a very round hole—in fact, it was the great symmetry 
which chiefly attracted my attention. Upon breaking down the 
stem, and cutting very carefully, I found the workmen within— 
the beautiful Carpenter Bees (Lestis eratus). Now, the most 
interesting part of this, is, that it points to an aberration of habit, 
in accordance with which these Bees usually burrow into the 
flowering stems of the “ grass-tree”’ (Xanthorrhea). Did they 
mistake this small stem—of the same thickness as a grass-tree 
stem—for the Xanthorrhea? With about half the labour involved 
in cutting the eucalypt, they could have burrowed three times as 
far in the Xanthorrhea. 

Some time ago, while I was on one of my periodical trips to 
my happy hunting-ground—Manly—I was turning over the stones 
on the border of the bush above the shore, when, amongst other 
things, I came across several specimens of a large Millipede 
(Julus). ‘This Millipede has a row of orifices along each side, 
one in the middle of each somite, from which, when irritated, it 
ejects a brownish-coloured fluid (in appearance much resembling 
lodine), which possesses an exceedingly penetrating pungent 
odour, very irritating indeed to the mucous membrane hning the 
nasal passages. But the supply of this fluid—which, scarcely 
without doubt, is for purposes of defence—seems to become very 
soon exhausted, as, after I had kept the Arthropods for a short 
time, scarcely any of the former odour was perceptible. Under 
this same stone I found specimens of a beautiful little Lizard 
(Lygosoma @quale), having very short, almost rudimentary legs, 
and truncate, though long, tail. 

A little farther along this shore is a large rock-pool, which I 
often visit. In it I made rather a unique discovery in the shape 
of a specimen of the Gastropod Hydatina physis in the act of 
oviposition. The animal itself is beautiful, but the spiral ribbons 
of eggs, embedded as they were in a transparent jelly-like proto- 
plasmic substance, were, in point of intrinsic beauty, equal to 
anything that I have ever observed. Molluscan ova are, of 
course, often to be met with; but unfortunately, in very many 
cases, without any satisfactory clue to the species to which they 


354 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


belong. In the present instance, however, there could be no 
doubt whatever. My friend Mr. Charles Hedley, F.L.S., of the 
Australian Museum, informs me that they much resemble an 
Aplysia figured by Rang. 

On another occasion, when at Manly, while walking along, I 
was very much struck with the conduct of an Ant. It saw me at 
the distance of a few paces. The insect was carrying what I 
thought to be a green leaf, but what turned out to be a compara- 
tively large larval ‘‘ Grasshopper,” several times the size of its 
bearer. The Ant seemed to become very excited, twisting round 
from side to side, looking at me all the time, and holding its 
prey up as highas it could. It appeared as if it were challenging 
me to come on (which I did), and when JI tried to effect its cap- 
ture it dropped its burden, and made several quick springs in my 
direction, leaping from five to six inches at a time. Whenever I 
moved to one side my little antagonist followed my motions with 
its eyes in the same manner as does the Mantis. It looked, 
indeed, so uncommonly human in its actions that when I captured 
it I had quite a large amount of respect for it. 

One morning I went to Mosman's Bay (Port Jackson), and 
walked from thence along the harbour coast. After walking for 
some distance, I observed two fishermen about to haul in their net ; 
so I went out with them in their boat, and assisted in the unloading 
of the net. It was a poor haul (2.e. looking at it from the fisher- 
men’s point of view, but not from the naturalist’s), consisting as 
it did almost solely of small Discophore and immature pelagic 
Crabs (Neptunus pelagicus (Pl. IV.) and N. sanguinolentus, Thala- 
mita sma, Charybdis cruciatus, and Nectocarcinus integrifrons). 
There were a few specimens of Squilla levis, also of the handsome 
Prawn Peneus canaliculatus, and of the smaller and commoner 
Prawn P. esculentus. There was also a goodly number of species of 
small fishes, the most noticeable of which were the ‘‘ Fortescues”’ 
(Pentaroge marmorata), and two specimens of the ‘‘ Stink Fish” 
(Callionymus curvicornis). The first mentioned is a harmless- 
looking little creature, but in reality it is just the reverse. It 
is armed on each side of the head with exceedingly sharp spines. 
When the poor unsuspecting mortal picks up one of these care- 
lessly, it whirls round its head suddenly, and the spines inflict a 
wound of a very painful nature. I captured several of these, 
however, without being injured. Whilst thus engaged I noticed 


ae 


ZOOLOGICAL NOTES FROM SYDNEY. ~— 355 


a most noisome odour arising. While I was still wondering 


mf whence this was proceeding, one of the fishermen quickly settled 


the point by placing one of the last-mentioned fishes under my 
nose. I can assure the reader that I did not allow him to keep 


- it there many seconds. It is a most objectionable stench, and 


would, in the writer's opinion, serve no doubt to restrain many 
other fishes from preying upon this one. In general appearance 
the fish is not unlike the “ Flathead” (Platycephalus fuscus), but 
the mouth is very considerably smaller. I found that the odour 
was given off from two orifices at the back of the eyes, one on 
each side of the occiput. 

I have no doubt that the story of the s.s. ‘Perthshire’ will 
be fresh in the memories of some readers at least. The 
vessel, while on a five days’ voyage from Sydney to the Bluff 
(N.Z.) during last year, broke down, and was helplessly adrift at 
the mercy of the elements for a period of five weeks. While she 
was lying disabled on the 5th of May, about five hundred miles 
from the nearest land—Cape Howe, N.S.W.—a common “ Bronze- 
wing Pigeon” (Phaps chalcoptera) flew aboard in an exhausted 
condition. The alighting of land-birds on ships close in shore, 
when the vessels are ‘‘ making the land,” is not an uncommon 
occurrence ; but that a Bronze-wing Pigeon should have found a 
haven on a disabled vessel five hundred miles from the nearest 
land is indeed singular. This Pigeon is a short-flight bird, and, 
although it travels long distances during the hours of a long 
summer's day, it does it with frequent rests. How then did this 
hapless Bronze-wing manage to keep up over the five hundred 
miles of storm-tossed sea until it reached the vessel? The flock 
Pigeons of the far west and interior, which come periodically in 


countless thousands, are tireless flyers, at times coming in such 


swarms that at a distance they appear like a drifting cloud; then 
for a year or two they are entirely absent. One of these last- 


- mentioned birds would have negotiated the distance (especially 


with the strong westerly wind behind it, which was blowing from 
the land at the time, and had been blowing for some days) with 
little difficuity. The marvellous thing is that a Bronze-wing 
should have done it; about the least likely species of Pigeon to 
attempt the feat—willingly! When I sawthe bird it looked very 
well, and none the worse for its adventures. 

Before finishing my notes on this occasion, I would like to 


356 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


mention one more incident. While out in the vicinity of North 
Harbour (Port Jackson), on Jan. Ist, 1900, I made a few observa- 
tions which I hope to be able to speak of on some future occasion; 
merely relating one of them at present. I was situated in a very 
pretty little nook of the harbour called Pirate’s Cove, and, as 
atmospheric conditions were favourable, waited till night came 
on. I was well repaid, for, upon darkness setting in, I found that 
the whole of the water flooding the cove was filled with myriads 
of the Noctiluca miliaris. Here and there the wake of some fish 
might be traced out in silver. Then every ripple on the water 
was crested with light; scattered plentifully between these were 
little individual globes of light, and as each wavelet plashed up 
on the rocks or sand it would leave many Noctiluce stranded. 
Wading in until the water was over my knees, my nether limbs 
suddenly became clothed with phosphorescence. As there was 
no moon, the whole contrived to form a most beautiful and 
fascinating display of Nature’s pyrotechnics. 

While on the subject of phosphorescence, I may mention that, 
while walking along Jarrah Beach (Botany Bay) recently at 
night time, my attention was attracted by the number of little 
‘‘ orbs of light”’ which were being washed in. At first I thought 
it was the Noctiluca, but, upon handling one, I perceived that it 
was hard to the touch, and therefore came to the conclusion that 
it was an Ostracod crustacean ; nor was I mistaken, for, upon 
examining it when I arrived home, I found that it was a species 
of Cypridina. When first I handled one of these it gave outa 
most brilliant greenish light; in fact, so strong was it that I was 
enabled to tell the time by my watch, the whole of the dial-plate, 
including the ‘‘second” marks, being visible. Though I have 
kept the animal alive since in a bottle of sea-water, it has not 
emitted any more light. 

While continuing our walk the same evening, my companion 
and myself came upon some fishermen who had just drawn in 
their net. It was loaded with fishes—principally small ‘ Mullet” 
(Mugil), though there was a somewhat varied assortment of 
others. As usual, there were amongst them a few ‘‘ Cat-fishes ” 
(Cnidoglanis megastoma). In feeling amongst the fishes in a net 
one had to be very careful not to come into contact with these 
animals. They have a most repulsive appearance, but this is 
not all. Amongst the cirrus which surrounds the mouth are 


ZOOLOGICAL NOTES FROM SYDNEY. 357 


_ spines covered with a poisonous mucus. This mucus causes the 
most severe paip when introduced into the system. My attention 
was here drawn to a sharp coughing sound, which I found pro- 
ceeded from two specimens of the ‘“‘ Fiddler”? Ray (Trygonorhina 


_ fasciata). Botany Bay is a great place for many species of 


Sharks, Rays, and other Flat-fishes. One Ray was procured 
_ from that locality which measured fifteen feet from “wing” to 
“ wing.” 
What a hideous monster is human ignorance! We have in 
this city bubonic plague (Pestis bubonica). In some of the 
factories hundreds of workmen have destroyed their dinner- 
- baskets. One may well ask, ‘‘ What connection is there between 
dinner-baskets and plague ?’? None whatever. That is to say, 
not any more than there might be with hundreds of other articles 
in daily use. The reason of their destruction is as follows :— 
Some of the men have discovered in their baskets the larve of 
the beetle which attacks this kind of ware. The beetles were 
there all the time, but the men had ‘“‘no eyes to see”’ till they 
became possessed of the plague scare. As they did not know 
what the larve were, they came to the conclusion that their 
occurrence in the baskets must have something to do with the 
plague. Speaking of ignorance reminds me that I once observed 
an itinerant microscopist exhibiting to a wondering crowd a 
small bottle containing small fresh-water crustaceans of the 
genus Cypris, but he informed them that the animals were— 
Hydatids. Returning to the plague. As a consequence of our 
visitation by this dread enemy, an enormous amount of dis- 
infectant has been poured daily into our drains and sewers. A 
great quantity of this has found its way into some of the bays of 
our harbour, and it has had the effect of asphyxiating thousands 
of fishes. The presence of all these fishes floating at the surface 
forms a unique and most unpleasant spectacle. 


EXPLANATION OF Puate IV.—Cenrrat Ficure.—Neptunus pelagicus, M.-Edw. ; 
mottled variety. Upper Cenrran Ficure.—Tubercular-setose variety. Lxrrr-Hanp 
Fiaures.—Urrer: Dwarfed cheliped. Lowrr: PLEopopaA. Female; sterile female ; 
male. Crnrrat Lower Ficurre. — Masticatory organs. RicuHr-Hanp FicurEs.— 
Urrrr: Sternal aspects: male; sterile female; female. Lower: Male; female; 
sterile female. 


308 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


A SHORT HISTORY OF THE BEARDED TITMOUSKE. 
By J. H. Gurney. 
(Puate V., Map.) 


Parus biarmicus, Linn. 8. N. 

P. russicus, Gmelin. 

Panurus biarmicus, Koch, Syst. d. Baier. Zool. p. 202. 
Afigythalus biarmicus, Boie. 

Mystacinus arundinaceus, Brehm. 

M. dentatus, Brehm. 

Calamophilus barbatus, K. and B. 

Hypenites barbatus, Gloger. 

Paroides biarmicus, Gray. 


It is now generally admitted that there is only a single species _ 


of Bearded Titmouse, and that species stands by itself as a very 
well-marked genus (Panurus of Koch), with no nearer allies, in 
the opinion of a high authority, than Paradoxornis flavirostris of 
Bengal, and Cholornis paradoxa ot China. Formerly better 
known as Calamophilus biarmicus, this curious bird is now 
nearly universally received by authors as Panurus biarmicus, but 
its position was for many years a moot point in ornithology, as 
the seven generic names at the head of my paper sufficiently 
indicate. Perhaps no one has done more to settle it finally than 


Professor Newton, who, in 1873, summed up the opinions of — 


previous writers with his usual conciseness, and gave an excellent 
general account of the bird. 

The “Reed Pheasant” of our Norfolk fenmen (so called from 
its resemblance in miniature to the nobler ‘“longtails”’ of the 
battue) or ‘‘ Maish [Marsh] Pheasant’ as they sometimes dub it, 
or ‘“‘Maish Tit” with a stress on the i—the Het Baardmannetje 
of the Dutch—has been regarded as a very remarkable bird, and 
has been the recipient of several English names. 


Tor manifold reasons this species has long attracted the ° 


attention of naturalists, and the following notes and recollections 


/ 


THE BEARDED TITMOUSE. 359 


_ of the bird in its haunts—which are in part drawn from an article 
in the Norfolk and Norwich Nat. Soc. Tr. (vi. p. 429)—are com- 
_ piled from different sources. 
$ It was discovered by the ever-enquiring author of the earliest 
treatise on Norfolk Birds, Sir Thomas Browne, who communicated 
his discovery to John Ray, who published the first notice and 
description in 1674, in a scarce little book of which Canon 
_ ‘Tristram is fortunate in having a copy. All subsequent authors 
appear to have been ignorant of this publication of Ray’s, and 
ignored it, and no continental naturalist describes the bird 
before Linnzus. 

Certainly it seems as if Sir Thomas Browne could not have 
been cognisant of the Bearded Titmouse when he drew up his 
memorable List of Birds (about the year 1663), yet the bird 
must have been an inhabitant close to Norwich. 

The picture of the Bearded Tit which Browne sent to Ray— 
probably delineated by the same hand which portrayed him the 
'Manx Shearwater,*—a literary curiosity, if it existed still—is 
tersely described in Ray’s ‘A Collection of English Words not 
generally used, as ‘A little Bird of a tawney colour on the 
back, and a blew head, yellow bill, black legs, shot in an Osiar 
[doubtless on the Yare] yard, called by Sr Tho. for distinction 
sake stlerella.”” A concise description of an adult male. 

In the ‘Synopsis methodica avium,’ by Ray, but published 
eight years after his death, the Bearded Tit finds a place (page 81) 
among birds doubtfully identified by Aldrovandus and others, as: 
“TI. Salicaria, Gesn. An Silerella D. Brown? Avicula est 
minima; colore partim fusco, ut parte prona’; &c. 


Distribution. 


At the present day the Bearded Titmouse is limited to the 
Norfolk Broad+ district, an area twenty-five by thirteen miles, of 
which part is marsh. Here it still breeds annually, and is found 
in little flocks throughout the autumn and winter, but whether 

* Browne also sent Ray several other pictures of birds (‘ Willoughby’s 
Ornithology,’ preface), but from a subsequent complaint it appears they were 
not returned (Wilkins’ edition of Sir T. Browne’s Works, i. p. 337). 

+ “Broad” is a local name for a shallow lake often surrounded with 
reeds, formed by the expansion of a river in former times; a ‘* broad-water ”’ 
it would be called in some counties, but in Norfolk and Suffolkitisa broad.” 


360 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


all these flocks are the same individuals which summer on the 
broads may be doubted. 

In some, if not in all, of its Dutch and German habitats it is 
alleged to be migratory. ‘This is the character which Schlegel 
and Naumann give it, and one might expect the same in England. 
In Normandy it is only a summer visitant, but, on the other 
hand, in Luxemburg it is regarded as a winter visitant, and 
Keulemans has known it to occur in Holland in winter. 

In Belgium it appears from Dubois’s ‘ Oiseaux observés en 
Belgique’ (1885) to be now very rare, though still to be some- 
times seen in the marshes of Flanders and Antwerp, no doubt 
the same causes operating to reduce its numbers as in England. 
As it does not go further south than the Mediterranean, or 
further north than Pomerania, its migrations cannot be very 
great, as they are confined between 37° N. lat. and 56° N. lat. 
Norfolk is very near its northern and its western limits. But 
in an easterly direction its range is very extensive, for it appears 
to reach right across Asia—where it becomes slightly paler— 
into China. 

According to l’Abbé David it is ‘ extrémement commune 
dans la région marécageuse qui s’étend au sud du coude septen- 
trional du Hoangho” (the Yellow River), and this is on the 
authority of Col. Prjevalsky, who brought back large collections 
of insects and birds from that country. (‘ Orn. Miscellany,’ 11. 
pe toh.) 

It is also found in Turkestan (‘Stray Feathers,’ 1876, p. 154), 
where, according to Dr. Scully, it is exceedingly common. 


(Cf. map, p. 374.) | 
Increasing Scarceness. 


We find very little about the Bearded Tit in the early 
authors, but this is not singular, because of the aquatic situations 


in which it resides, and Latham (1783) remarks that these birds 


had only been observed in marshy situations, as though, their 
peculiar characteristics not being known, there were some who 
thought they might be looked for in woods and thickets! 

From Sir T. Browne’s day (1674) to Sir William Hooker’s 
(Diary 1807-40) there appears to be no Norfolk mention of the 


Bearded Tit. Hooker, occupied with plants, merely says that 


it was by no means infrequent at Surlingham Broad, which was 


THE BEARDED TITMOUSE. 361 


for long after a favourite locality, and where a marshman named 


Trent (now dead) used, I am sorry to say, to shoot a great many. 
Then there is John Hunt, the Norwich birdstuffer, who remarks 
that in 1819 there were large flocks at Burlingham (? Surlingham), 
Norf. and Nor. Nat. Tr. (iii. p. 260); but ten years later we find 
the same Hunt speaking of it as not common (Stacy, Hist. of 


Norf.), which the brothers Paget, writing in 1834, qualify into 


*“common in some seasons.” 
Contemporary with Hunt’s second statement is a very de- 


- scriptive letter from J. D. Hoy to the well-known naturalist Selby, 
_ printed in the Norf. and Nor. Nat. Trans. (ii. p. 402), and which 
_ was the basis of a lengthy communication to the Magazine of 
Nat. Hist. 1830, p. 828. Hoy writes to Selby as follows :— 


“June 23rd, 1828.—Sir, having been highly gratified in 


looking over your splendid ‘Illustrations of British Ornithology,’ 


and thinking that anything you had not perhaps observed in the 
habits of some of our birds might not be uninteresting to you, I 
have ventured to forward you a few observations. . ... 

**T have had several nests of that most beautiful and elegant 
of our indigenous birds, the Bearded Titmouse. ‘The margins 
of the extensive pieces of water, called broads, in the south- 
eastern part of Norfolk, which are skirted with large tracts of 
reeds, are the favourite abode of this species: its nest is 
composed, on the outside, with the decayed leaves of the sedge 
and reed, intermixed with a few pieces of grass, and invariably 
lined with the top of the reeds in the same manner as the Reed 
Wren. It is not so compact a nest as the Reed Wren’s; the 
eggs vary in number from four to six, pure white sprinkled all 
over with small purplish spots, rather confluent at the larger 


end; full size of the Greater Titmouse. ‘The nest is generally 


placed in a tuft of grass or rushes near the ground by the side of 
the water ditches in the fens, sometimes on the broken-down 
reeds, but never suspended between the reed stems in the 
manner of the Reed Wren. In the autumn they disperse them- 
selves in little parties along shore, wherever there is an acre or 
two of reeds; during the winter months they feed entirely on the 
seed of the reed, and so busily employed are they in searching for 
their food that I have taken them with a fine bird-lime twig 
attached to the end of a fishing-rod. When alarmed by any 
Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., August, 1900. 2c 


362 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


noise they drop down among the reeds, but soon resume their 
station again, climbing up the reed-stems with the greatest 
facility.” 

Though now slightly recovering its numbers, the Bearded 
Tit has become very scarce in Norfolk, and almost extinct in 
Suffolk. Self-interested marshmen and egg-collectors would like 
strangers to believe that this scarcity is owing to hard winters ; 
but their own cupidity is one cause of the decrease, for the 
truth is, that Bearded Tits are not nearly so delicate as their 
frail appearance would seem to imply; indeed, Mr. K. T. Booth 
used to call them remarkably hardy, and in his ‘ Catalogue’ says 
that they seem able to contend against severe weather with greater 
success than many much larger and apparently stronger birds. 
This I quite believe to be the case, for they are not tender in 
confinement. 

Having asked the Rev. M. C. Bird, who lives among the 
broads, to keep notes as to their presence or absence, he being 
constantly on the spot, I received the following memoranda last 
spring :— 

March 14th, 1899.—Four pairs seen. 

April 14th.—A nest at Potter Heigham. 

April 17th.—Three nests, with four, four, and five eggs 
respectively ; two more nests, and a sixth taken. 

April 25th.—Three nests found. 

April 28th.—Additional nest with young a few days old. 

May list.—Another nest. 

May 6th.—The nest found on the Ist has eight eggs; another 
nest found to-day. 

May 19th.—A nest with young flown. 

With Mr. Bird’s assistance I have compiled an estimate of the 
number of nests hatched off in 1898 on every broad in Norfolk 
where there is reason to think that there are any. This only 
gives a total for them all of thirty-three nests, as tabulated in the 
Trans. Norf. and Nor. Nat. Soc. (vi. p. 480), but the number may 
be slightly more. It is unnecessary to recapitulate the list, which 
has only a local interest, but we may assess the number of adult — 
Bearded Tits in April, 1899, on Norfolk Broads, as certainly one © 
hundred; but there were not more than seven nests on any one 
broad, and it will be a diminishing quantity unless the arm of. 


THE BEARDED TITMOUSE. 363 


_ the law is upheld. Happily there is a desire on all hands to 
do this, and one gentleman even negotiated for the purchase of 
an estate, it was said, for the sole purpose of protecting the 
Bearded Tits. 

The following is an approximate estimate of their decrease 
in Norfolk in six decennial periods since 1838, but the earlier 
figures given are little more than a guess :— 

18388 1848 1858 1868 1878 1888 1898 

Number of Nests 200 170 140 125 90 45 88 


The number of broads on which they now nest is about eleven 
large, and ten small ones, not including Wroxham Broad, where 
_ boating has banished them, though the Grebes remain. 

One cause of their decrease is that the celebrated broads are 
gradually, but it is to be feared surely, growing up, though there 
is another more potent reason. For years, prior to 1895, there 
Was a systematic trade in their eggs, and every egg dealer and 
moth hunter helped himself. Such devastation was criminal, but 
happily it is stopped now. 

Both birds and eggs are protected by law, and the remnant 
are already feeling benefit from the protection afforded by this 
salutary measure, which came into force on May Ist, 1895. 
The broads where the Bearded Tits have had the best chance of 
escaping persecution are the small private ones, and those places 
- where the proprietors have allowed the reeds to grow instead of 
cutting them, thereby providing high cover, which is an asylum 
where many a nest may escape the keenest eye. Unfortunately 
for the birds, it is rather an easy nest to find, for a pair will 
choose one particular bed of reeds year after year rather than 
move away. 

Since the drainage of Salthouse sea-broad in 1851, the 
Bearded Tit has ceased to breed there, but the reed beds in 
Cley, adjoining, are still large enough to attract occasional 
migrants. It is very likely that the examples met with by 
Dr. Power and others in 1895, and on several previous occasions 
near Cley sluice, and at Morston and Burnham further west, had 
crossed the German Ocean, as also those seen in a pond at 
Holt in September, 1898, and May, 1899. In December, 1899, 
four were seen at Wiveton, still further north, where they 


remained a month. 
2c2 


PY a THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Habits. 


In its nest, and all that concerns the Bearded Titmouse, a 
protective colour may readily be traced. The old cock’s black 
moustaches (which in Mongolian specimens are narrower) are 
like the dark chinks in the reeds, while his tawny colouring 


harmonises with the brown tints of autumn, and in spring there © 


is a bloom on his freshly moulted plumage which goes well 
with the bursting into leaf of all around. Nowhere is the blend 
of nature’s harmony better seen than in the flowers, insects, and 
birds of the broads, where everything suits its surroundings. 

It has been said that these moustaches, from which the bird 
takes its name, are movable, and that their play gives a peculiar 
animation to the bird’s expression, and it is likely enough that 
during courtship and before the breeding season thisisso. They 
are composed of a considerable number of feathers, and, though 
wanting in the hen, there is a perceptible lengthening in her 
corresponding feathers, which are white. 

A more beautiful object than a cock Bearded Tit in April, 
clinging tail uppermost to a tall reed stem gently waved by 
each gust of wind, it is difficult to imagine. Except in the 
vicinity of their nests, or when curiosity gets the better of 
them, they are shy and inclined to hide, but by their nests they 
give every opportunity for inspection as they flit across one 
mown space after another, betraying by their very anxiety the 
eggs which they wish to conceal. 

They become still more unsuspecting when they have young, 
care for which causes many a bird to defy danger; yet they. have 
much of that strange sense which we call instinct, and which tells 
them to creep to their well-hidden domicile, rather than fly to it 
in the presence of the enemy. 

If there is any wind, they are not hkely to show themselves, 
and this has been noticed in South Russia, for a wind which is 
enough to wave the tops of the reeds is enough to keep the Tits 
at the bottom. But when all is quiet they venture to the 
reed-tops, and, when concealed for a shot at Wild Duck, one 
has in this way sometimes the delight of being surrounded by an 
inquisitive little flock, and this is the time to study their engaging 
and active ways. 

The flight of the Bearded Tit may be described as laboured, 


i 
t 


THE BEARDED TITMOUSE. 365 


as it flits rather than flies along with head rather high, in little 


parties just topping the reeds, and each bird half spreading the 
twelve graduated feathers of its heavy tail, intended to steer by, 
but surely incommoding rapid progress. 

I have been surprised to find, when walking with an old marsh- 
man, an experienced “‘egger,”’ how often he heard their notes when 
neither of us could see the bird, long experience in listening for 
the rarer, and to him profitable species, having sharpened his 
ear. The clear ringing of their call-notes, which one admirer 


_ compares to cymbals, and another to the mandoline, can never, 


says Lord Lilford, be mistaken for any other European bird 


by a good ear which has once heard it. By one observer 


the silvery notes are syllabled as ‘‘thein, thein,” by another 


as “‘ping, ping,” or, when alarmed, ‘‘churr, churr”; while the 


provincial name in the south of France is ‘‘Trintrin”’ (Crespon 


and Jaubert); but here its place is to some extent taken by 
Aiigithalus pendulinus. 

It is said that young Bearded Tits, after they have left the 
nest, sometimes nestle together in a cluster on the reeds of our 
broads, but this habit does not seem to have been observed on 
the Continent. Hoy’s account of their habits has been quoted 
already, and need not be repeated (cf. letter, p. 361). 

Their food is not entirely the seeds of the reed, but minute 
water insects and their larve, and one sent by me to the late 
Mr. Cordeaux contained a good deal of river sand. ‘The reed- 
cutters have told me of seeing them searching the floating 
“muds” of nearly severed reed, which I have no doubt is 
explained by the following note:—Mr. W. H. Dikes, having 
examined three specimens, writes that the crops did not contain 


a single seed, but, on the contrary, were completely filled with the 


Succinea amphibia in a perfect state, the shell being unbroken. 
These shells were closely packed together, the crop of one which 
was not larger than a hazel-nut containing twenty, and four of 
Pupa muscorum. (Mag. N. H. iii. p. 239.) 


Nidification. 


The Bearded Tit is a very early breeder. Booth says: “I 
have on several occasions seen young birds able to leave the 
nest by the 4th or 5th of May, and so late as the middle of 


366 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


August have known the female sitting on eggs” (‘ Rough Notes,’ 
vol. i. p. 88). On one occasion I found some young as big as 
their parents in the middle of June, and on the same day an 
incomplete clutch of fresh eggs, which would indicate that they 
sometimes breed three times in a season, the first clutch of eggs 
being therefore hatched in April. Besides this, the number of 
eggs laid by Mr. Young’s tame birds, to be mentioned presently, 
confirms me in thinking that they breed three, possibly even 
four times, in a very favourable season. 

After the breeding season the young form themselves into 
family parties, but it is certainly not the case that the males and 
females keep distinct (cf. Mag. N. H., 1829, p. 224), and such a 
flock as fifty together (‘ Birds of Norfolk,’ i. p. 151) is not to be 
heard of now in England. 

Continental authors give all sorts of sites for the nest, such 
as a hut built for duck shooting, but in Norfolk it is placed 
among reeds (never in nettles, very exceptionally in rushy 
grass), and is said to take eight days in construction. It is 
generally a foot above the ground, if a swamp can be called 
ground, and never, to the best of my belief, suspended. The 
tallest and stoutest reeds in the reed-bed are its customary 
support, reeds eight feet high, sometimes quite sere, while 
exceptionally a nest is hid in a dwarf Alder or cluster of Sweet 
Gale (Bog Myrtle), a shrub with that aromatic odour which 
prevails on a dry marsh in June, the Cuckoo’s favourite perch. 
Here it may be remarked that, common as the Cuckoo is round 
most of our broads, there is no record of its egg being deposited 
in the nest of the Bearded Tit, which is very singular. 

The nests ‘‘ are extremely liable to be submerged if the tides 
rise suddenly, either from a heavy fall of rain or a flow of salt 
water up the river. In such cases the birds at once commence 
a second nest on the top of their first edifice’’ (Booth, l.c.). I 
have not personally heard of any nests being submerged, but 
Booth was always an accurate observer, and can be trusted. 

The nest is about 2°8 inches inside diameter, and is usually 
composed of the brown blades of the common Arundo, and lined 
with their feathery tops. A typical nest with its surroundings 
is reproduced in the Norf. and Nor. Nat. Tr. (vi. p. 434), from a 
photograph by Mr. R. B, Lodge, who writes :—*‘ Within fifty yards 


THE BEARDED TITMOUSE. 367 


of our boat we had two nests with eggs, six each, one with young 
birds, and one from which young had apparently flown, and I 
saw the young birds early in May flying about. At one nest at 
which I spent half a day squatting in the same sedge bush, the cock 
did most of the sitting; he was easily distinguished, even at 4 
distance, as he had no tail. They are the most fascinating birds 


Nest of Bearded Titmouse (after Pike). 


I know, and the easiest to approach at the nest, especially when 
the young are hatched. All our nests were in sedge.” 

Other photographers have visited our broads and been 
successful, notably Mr. Oswin Lee (‘Photographs of Brit. Birds,’ 
pt. vili.), whose large plate is worthy of all commendation, while 
that by Mr. Kearton, in ‘Our Rarer British-breeding Birds,’ 


368 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


shows the eggs well in a characteristic bed of rushes. But the 
cleverest of all are the pictures taken by Mr. O. G. Pike (see 
pt. iv. of his recently published ‘In Bird Land’), which, owing 
to his kindness, I am able to reproduce. It will be seen that in 
one the hen is feeding her young ones, which Mr. Pike observed 
that she did about every five minutes, distributing a beakful of 


Bearded Titmouse feeding young (after Pike). 


green caterpillars equally among all. In the other plate Mr. 
Pike has caught the hen in the act of cleaning out the nest, 
which she did on about every fourth visit. 

The eggs are very peculiar, and at the same time very pretty ; 
white, with specks and wavy lines of brown, with a pink tinge 
when fresh, and a zone when incubated. They (the first clutch) are 


THE BEARDED TITMOUSE. 369 


deposited in April, or even at the end of March possibly, and 
generally six in number, occasionally seven. Old Joshua, the 
companion of my rambles, averred that he had found two nests 
on the top of one another, and on another occasion twelve eggs in 
_ one nest, while a nest sent from Hickling to Mr. Frank Norgate 
contained ten eggs, but two of them were buried in the lining, 
and this year one was found at Hickling with eight eggs. Joshua 


de 


(awe ae ee ee 


Bearded Titmouse cleaning out Nest (after Pike). 


had also known them to sometimes lay the first egg before the 
nest was finished, and then, after a layer of material, more 
eggs, a common habit with true Titmice (Paride). An egg 
taken by Joshua was placed in an incubator by Mr. Evans, of 
Edinburgh, to ascertain the duration of its incubation, a subject 
he has specially studied, but the experiment was not success- 
ful. John Smith, of Yarmouth, considered the period to be 


370 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


thirteen days (Zool., 1846, p. 1497), and Tidemann fourteen. 
None of the small birds appear to exceed a fortnight, but in such 
a distinct form as Panuwrus there might be a difference of a day 
or two. 

I can testify to its being a fact that the cock bird occasionally 
takes part in incubation, though this has been doubted by 
Keulemans, who had in confinement the beautiful examples 
figured in Dresser’s ‘ Birds of Europe,’ and probably ascertained 
from them that the duration of the moult was nearly five weeks. 
His excellent account of its habits as a cage bird and in a wild 
state in Holland is given in the ‘ Birds of Europe,’ and again 
in Keuleman’s ‘ Cage Birds,’ an uncompleted work, and therefore 
but little known. 


Description. 


The adult male and female are almost too well known to 
need description. The prevailing colour is tawny orange, and in 
the cock the head is blue grey, with a black moustache on each 
cheek, long and pointed, with no apparent utility other than 
ornament. These beautiful colours are at their best from 
December to April Ist, after which they deteriorate. Females are 
never so handsome as males, and always lack the grey head, 
which is so beautiful: excellent descriptions are given in 
the ‘Birds of Europe’ from specimens which I supplied of 
both sexes. But the plumage of immaturity is far more 
remarkable. 

For a long time after quitting the nest the young have black 
backs, and are cream-coloured, so that if Bonaparte gave his 
name of P. sibiricus to a young bird it was a very excusable 
mistake. Radde was nearly led into the same error (‘ Ibis,’ 1889, 
p. 87). 

It is said that young males can be distinguished by their 
more lemon-coloured bills. The nestling when only a day old 
has a brighter mouth than any other nestling bird in England, 
for the palate is red, with four little rows of black and white 
dots. Mr. Lodge tried to photograph a brood with their mouths 
open, but it was a failure, and my sketch is not sufficiently 
accurate for reproduction, indeed, it would be exceedingly difficult 
to give the vivid colours properly. The colour of young birds’ 


THE BEARDED TITMOUSE. 371 


mouths has not been sufficiently taken notice of. The nestling 
Blackcap’s mouth is lake red, the nestling Willow Warbler’s 
yellow, the Pied Wagtail dull yellow, and the Garden Warbler, 
according to Bettoni, buff. The nestling Hedge Sparrow has 
two black spots on its tongue, and the Grasshopper Warbler 
several spots (Macpherson). Probably none of these tints are 
lost until the young have left the nest. 


Anatomy. 


Under the heading of “ Anatomy,” I cannot do better than 
quote the precise description of Prof. Macgillivray, who in this 
branch of science especially excelled over other writers :— 

‘“‘(sophagus one inch two-twelfths long, inclined to the right, 
with a distinct dilatation or crop a quarter of an inch in width; 
the proventriculus bulbiform. Stomach a very muscular gizzard, 
six and a half twelfths long, seven twelfths broad, obliquely 
placed, with the lateral muscles very prominent, the epithelium 
dense, with broad ruge, and of a yellowish colour, the right 
muscle two twelfths thick. The trachea as in the Passerine 
and Cantatores ; its rings sixty.”—(William Macgillivray.) 

See also ‘‘ Remarks on the Internal Structure,’ by Robert F. 
Tomes, ‘ Ibis,’ 1860, p. 317. 


In Confinement. 


Since 1748, when the Countess of Albemarle brought a 
cageful of Bearded Tits from Copenhagen, it has been popular 
with bird-fanciers in this country, and the experience of all 
who have tried it is that it is a bird in every way to be 
recommended for the cage. There is no need to infringe on our 
native stock, for continental birds, which, in the opinion of some 
are finer than British, can be generally bought from Erbermehl, 
Abrahams, or Zache. 

Mr. John Young has written one of the best accounts of this 
charming species in captivity (Norf. and Nor. Nat. Tr. iii. p. 519), 
and I am indebted to him for showing me his cage. He first of 
all provided them with proper nesting places and material, by 
sticking the tops of pampas grass round a six-inch pot of earth, 
a site somewhat similar to the reeds of their native haunts, 


372 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Here the eggs were laid early in the morning, and when the 
birds had left the nest he invariably found that the lining was 
pulled over the eggs. Many eggs were laid, two hens laying 
more than fifty in one summer, a fair proportion of which in a 
wild state would have been hatched. 

Mr. Young thinks they might be hatched, and even the young 
reared in confinement, by supplying the old birds with the pupsz 
of the common blow-fly, which he has found to answer with 
Siskins, and fresh ants’ eggs would probably be useful. He kept 
one nearly five years. Mr. Lowne, of Yarmouth, a well known 
prize-taker at bird shows, reared six Bearded Tits from the nest 
on dry ants’ eggs with hard-boiled egg well sieved, but they were 
pugnacious enough to pull each other’s tails out, and had to be 
separated. 

Another correspondent, Mr. J. L. Bonhote, had a pair three 
years, and kept them in an outdoor avairy through the hard winter 
of 1895. In 1896 the hen built a nest with materials brought her 
by the cock, and, commencing on April 14th, laid a clutch of 
seven eggs, two of which were hatched on the thirteenth day, 
and the young grew well, but died suddenly on the seventh day 
when beginning to shoot their feathers.* 


Former Breeding Area. 


In the accompanying Map (Pl. V.) the pink colour is intended 
to show where this species formerly bred in England, an area which 
must always have coincided with the reed beds suitable to its 
requirements, which, prior to the draining of the great Bedford 
Level in the early part of the seventeenth century, were much 
more extensive than they are now. Of the nineteen spots 
marked pink in the map, only one is still a breeding-place at the 
present day, which is a somewhat sad reflection; while the old 
haunts on the Thames have long been deserted, though still 
sometimes referred to in books. 

As it is a good plan to summarise what is known about any 
British bird’s distribution (as Fatio and Studer are doing for 
Switzerland and Ternier for France), I have given at some length, 


* Mr. Bonhote has just published an article on this subject (cf. ‘ Avi- 
cultural Magazine’ for August. 


THE BEARDED TITMOUSE. 373 


from such sources as are still available, what can be gathered from 
authors about the Bearded Tit in the Norf. and Nor. Nat. Trans. 
vi. p. 429, and the following further particulars may be added. 


It only breeds in Norfolk, and the only other counties in which 


it is still to be found with any sort of regularity are Suffolk 
and Cambridgeshire. 

In Suffolk, in March, 1899, a small flock was seen on Fritton 
Lake and another on Oulton Broad, where, from enquiries on 
the spot in 1885, I found it was to be met with; and in 1891 
My. Bunn, the taxidermist, informed me of his having had several 
from there at different times. Babington gives interesting 
particulars of their former haunts (Birds of Suff. pp. 64, 251), but 
they are now extinct on the Blyth and the Alde, but Mr. Tuck 
was recently informed of some being on the River Lack. 

In Lincolnshire the late Mr. Cordeaux never met with a 
specimen, yet in 1864 A. G. More thought it might breed in 
that county (‘Ibis,’ 1865, p. 120), which was one of the five 
enumerated by W. C. Hewitson. It is certain that when Gould, 
in 1878, said it bred in all the fenny districts of Lincolnshire, he 
was entirely wrong. Miller Christy has collected interesting 
details of its former abundance in Essex, and even thought it 
possible in 1890 that it might still be reckoned a resident in 
extremely small numbers, though the last identified seems to 
have been on the River Stort in July, 1888 (‘ Birds of Essex,’ 
pp. 91, 92). 

In Cambridgeshire, Mr. John Titterton, of Ely, does not 
know the last date of its breeding, but is able to give the most 
recent information of migrants, viz. that in 1897 fourteen were 
seen, and in 1898 a flock of five, and again in December, 1899, a 
flock of about a dozen, which remained for more than a month 
in one place. These, however, by the end of January, 1900, had 
been so upset by the harvesting of the reeds that only three or 
four remained. In the palmy days of Whittlesea Mere they 
must have been abundant, but Whittlesea is a thing of the past. 
A pair obtained there in 1841 are in Newcastle Museum, and it 
is on record that this locality furnished a white variety. 

For Surrey, some additional particulars are given in the 
‘Birds of Surrey,’ by J. A. Bucknill, who remarks that authors 
have regarded the Bearded Tit as having been a resident at one 


a“ 


374 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


time in Surrey, but he has not been able to discover any evidence 
of such being the case. 7 


General Distribution. (Cf. ante, p. 360.) 


( 375 ) 


a oOV St. ore. “LU ps 
By F. L. Buatuawayr. 


Lunpy has from time to time been visited by several eminent 
ornithologists, who have published accounts of the birds they 
noticed ; but, with the exception of the pages relating to birds in 
Mr. J. R. Chanter’s monograph on the island, published in 1877, 
I have not been able to find any attempt at a complete list of the 
avifauna of Lundy. A notice therefore with regard to the birds 
I came across during a recent visit may be useful to anyone con- 
templating the formation of a full list of the birds of Lundy, and 
may also interest some of the readers of ‘ The Zoologist.’ | 

After being detained two days at Instow by the stormy weather, 
I was at last able to cross to Lundy on May 5th of the present 
year, in the sailing vessel ‘ Gannet,’ which takes the mail from 
Instow to the island every week. 

Lundy, which, with the exception of the south-east corner, 
consists almost entirely of granite, rises from 300 to 500 ft. out 
of the sea, and lies in the entrance to the Bristol Channel, about 
twelve miles north-west of Hartland Point, its nearest point on 
the mainland. It is about three miles in length, and less than a 
mile in width in its broadest part. The southern portion of the 
top is under cultivation, but the greater part is moorland, and 
covered with heath, furze, and coarse grass, with large granite 
boulders protruding in many places, especially at the northern 
end. On the eastern side the land slopes towards the sea, and is 
covered in many places with tangled masses of bramble and 
bracken, out of which rise here and there huge piles of granite, 
some of them taking very fantastic forms. There are very few 
landing-places, the best being at the south-east corner, where 
there is a shingly beach in a natural harbour; but even here it 
is difficult to get ashore with dry feet, if the wind happens to be 
in the east. 

The cliffs on the western side are for the most part higher and 


376 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


steeper than on the eastern, and consequently these are the 
favourite haunts of the cliff-birds for which Lundy is famous. 
When I arrived, on May 5th, I was told that all the birds had 
not yet come in from the sea, but during my short stay they 
arrived daily in large numbers, and by May 11th, the date on 
which I left, most of the sea birds must, I think, have settled 
down in their summer quarters. On May 7th particularly, which 
was a fine warm day, I noticed the Puffins coming in from the 
sea to the island in a continuous stream. 

I was most anxious to find out whether the Gannet (Sula 
bassana) still nested on Lundy, and was pleased to find a few on 
the island, though I fear they are in great danger of extermina- 
tion. Three pairs were building near the lighthouse at the 
northern end, and, if they are not disturbed, their numbers will 
no doubt increase. From what I hear, however, it is very seldom 
that they manage to take away any young, as the eggs have a 
market value of one shilling apiece. The history of the Gannets 
on Lundy is not pleasant reading for a lover of birds. In former 
times they inhabited an island off the north-east end, still called 
after them ‘‘the Gannet Rock.’ They were so persecuted, how- 
ever, that they deserted this rock, and tried to establish them- 
selves on the island itself; while some are thought to have 
migrated to Grassholm, an island off Pembrokeshire, where there 
is at present a small colony. The Gannets which remained on 
Lundy unfortunately did not escape persecution by their change 
of quarters; but in spite of this they persevered, and, from what 
I can gather from the islanders, there were about thirty pairs of 
breeding birds as lately as six or seven years ago. Unfortunately 
for the birds, the very spot they had chosen on which to build 
their nests was selected for the erection of the new lighthouse at the 
northern extremiy, which, I believe, was opened towards the end 
of 1897. The quarrying and blasting operations which attended 
the building of this hghthouse necessarily disturbed the Gannets, 
though some few pairs seem to have clung to their old haunts, 
even while the work was in progress. Their numbers seem now 
to have dwindled down to the three or four pairs which I saw this 
year, and it is earnestly to be hoped that they will not be driven 
from this their only known nesting-place on English ground. 
The few remaining pairs seem to have learnt wisdom by experi- 


A. VISIT TO LUNDY. 377 


_ ence, and have selected a place where only bold climbers could 
_ reach their nests. Formerly, I am told, they built their nests in 
places where any child could take their eggs without danger. 

The building of the lighthouse and the noise of the fog-horns 
seem to have disturbed all the sea-fowl at the northern end of the 
island, and their numbers are said to be far smaller: than in 
former years. Puffins, Guillemots, Razorbills, and Kittiwakes, 
however, still breed on the island in enormous numbers. 

The Guillemots (Uria troile) have their colonies chiefly on 
the northern half of the western face of Lundy, where, in com- - 
pany with Razorbills (Alca torda), and Kittiwakes (Rissa tri- 
dactyla), they may be seen standing in rows, or packed closely 
together in bunches, wherever they can find a foothold on the 
cliffs. I noticed in particular one tall rock which was flat at the 
top, and on this the Guillemots were packed almost as closely as 
they are on the famous “ Pinnacles” at the Farnes during the 
breeding season. 

The chief colony of the Puffins (F'ratercula arctica) is at the 
northern end, where the birds burrow in the soft soil among a 
débris of huge granite boulders scattered about in wild confusion. 
The number of the birds must be enormous, as, when one ap- 
proaches the colony, all the rocks and the sea beneath appear to 
be covered with Puffins and Razorbills; while hundreds more 
are swinging round and round in a large circle, which extends 
some distance over the water. JI was much struck by the 
remarkable tameness of the birds. As long as I kept fairly still 
they appeared to have no fear at all, and in a few minutes I had 
Puffins and Razorbills all round me, and some almost within 
arm’s length. One Razorbill perched on the very stone which I 
had selected as a seat. 

The Kittiwake is by far the most numerous of the Gulls on 
the island, and their chief quarters are on the north-west side in 
company with the Guillemots, and in two clefts at the north end. 
Their nests appear to be stuck against the faces of the cliffs, 
and on some of the most precipitous rocks it seems wonderful 
how the birds manage to get any hold at all. 

. Besides the Kittiwake, three species of Gulls breed on Lundy 
—the Herring-Gull (Larus argentatus), and the Lesser and 
Greater Black-backed Gulls (L. fuscus and L. marinus). There 

Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., August, 1900. 2D 


378 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


are colonies of the two former species in suitable places all round 
the island, but in numbers the Herring-Gulls are superior, 
though to no very great extent. At the time of my visit the 
birds had just commenced laying. The Greater Black-backed 
Gull is much rarer, and I never saw more than four or five 
together. There are probably not more than six or seven pairs 
of these fine birds on Lundy, where, I am told, they usually 
select one of the rocky islets on which to place their nests. 

I frequently saw one or two Common Buzzards (Buteo 
vulgaris), but could not be sure that there were more than one 
pair on the island. From the behaviour of the birds, I was con- 
vinced that there was a nest on the face of a certain cliff, though 
I was unable to locate it exactly. This species is happily still 
fairly common in North Devon, and early in April last year I 
saw no fewer than eleven during a day’s ramble along the cliffs. 
On more than one occasion three could be seen on the wing at 
the same time. 

But to return to Lundy. I noticed that Kestrels were fairly 
common, and I discovered the eyrie of a pair of Peregrines 
(Falco peregrinus) by accidentally startling the Falcon from the 
face of a steep cliff. She was quickly joined by her mate, and 
the two birds circled above my head, keeping up a continuous 
chattering cry as long as I remained in the neighbourhood of 
their stronghold. Another pair had, I think, established them- 
selves at the opposite end of the island near the Shutter 
Rock. This Falcon may often be seen on the Devon coast 
opposite Lundy, and a pair can frequently be observed on Baggy 
Point. 

A pair or two of Ravens (Corvus corax) are said to nest on 
Lundy, but by the time of my visit (early in May) they would 
probably have taken off their young, and I only noticed a single 
bird. This bird still nests on many of the bold rocky headlands 
of the North Devon coast. : 

Some years ago, it is said, a feud broke out between the 
Peregrines and Ravens on Lundy, and one of the aerial conflicts 
which were continually taking place ended in disaster to one of 
the Ravens, which, failing to elude the Falcon’s fatal ‘‘ stoop,” 
was struck down into the sea and drowned. I have noticed that 
wherever these two species nest in close proximity, duels in mid- 


em 


A VISIT TO* LUNDY. 379 


air are of continual occurrence, but, as a rule, they do not 
appear to be attended with much bloodshed. 

The Carrion-Crow (Corvus corone) breeds on the island, and 
isnot uncommon. After the young have left the nest, twelve or 
more of these birds may be seen together. The Rev. H. G. 
Heaven, proprietor of the island, told me that a few years ago 
one or two Hooded Crows (C. cornizx), usually only autumn and 
winter visitors, remained during the summer, and he thought 
that they interbred with the Carrion-Crows. This supposition 
is in a measure confirmed by the fact that I saw several birds on 
the island which to all appearance were hybrids between the 
Carrion and Hooded Crows. 

The Jackdaw (C. monedula) is only a visitor, as is also the 
Rook (C. frugilegus), and neither species has been known to 
breed on the island; while the Chough (Pyrrhocorax graculus), 
formerly common, has now been quite exterminated. Their final 
disappearance is said to be due to the persecution they received 
from the men who some years ago were engaged in quarrying 
granite on the eastern side of the island. One of the islanders 
told me that in former years he often saw small flocks of Choughs 
flying about the fields, but that they no longer nested on the 
island. The price which may be obtained for the skins and 
eggs of these birds has done much towards banishing them from 
many of their former haunts, but I believe a few pairs may still 
be found on some parts of the Devonshire coasts. 

Of the smaller land birds, the commonest, during my visit, 
were perhaps the Linnet (Linota cannabina), Wheatear, Skylark, 
and Meadow Pipit; while the House-Sparrow, formerly only a 
visitor, has now established a flourishing colony on the buildings 
of the Manor Farm. 

The following birds I also identified on Lundy during my 
short stay :— Song-Thrush, Blackbird, Whinchat, Stonechat, 
Greater Whitethroat, Willow-Wren, Hedge-Sparrow, Wren, 
Yellow Wagtail, Rock-Pipit, Swallow, House-Martin, Sand- 
Martin, Goldfinch, Yellow Bunting, Cirl Bunting, Starling, 
Swift, Cuckoo, Cormorant, Shag, Corn-Crake, Lapwing, Golden 
Plover, Dunlin (the last two birds both in breeding plumage), 
and Oystercatcher. 

The Manx Shearwater (Pufinus anglorum) is also well known 

2d2 


380 THE ZOOLOGIST. - 


on Lundy, where it probably breeds, and the same remark very 
possibly may be applied to the Storm Petrel (Procellaria pelagica). 
These two species often escape notice owing to their nocturnal 
habits, but the weird cries of the former are said to be often heard | 
by the islanders during the night. 

Mr. Heaven told me of a tradition which still exists on the 
island relating to the former occurrence of a bird which, if not 
simply mythical, could be none other than the Great Auk. The 
story is, I think, worth repeating, but must, however, as Mr. 
Heaven impressed upon me, be taken for what it is worth. As 
far as I can remember it runs as follows:—About the year 1839 
one of the men on the island brought in a large egg (which was 
kept by Mr. Heaven’s family for some time until unfortunately 
broken), which he declared belonged to a “ King Murr” (on Lundy 
Guillemots and Razorbills are both known as “ Murrs’’). The 
“King Murrs,” the man said, were birds like ‘ Razorbilled 
Murrs,”’ only much larger; he did not think they could fly, as 
they were only seen near the water, into which they scrambled 
from the rocks when disturbed. There were only one or two 
pairs ever seen, but they had long been known on the island. A 
fuller account of this same story is, I believe, to be found in 
‘ The Zoologist’ for 1866,* though I have not the means of looking 
up the exact reference. The story is interesting, though it can- 
not be said to prove that the Great Auk was ever an inhabitant 
of Lundy. 

I would advise anyone interested in birds, who may chance 
to visit Lundy by excursion steamer, to spend the two or 
three hours allowed on land in exploring the coast-line of the 
northern half of the island. It will have to be done hurriedly 
in the limited time at the tourist’s disposal, as it takes about an 
hour to walk from the landing-place to the North Lighthouse. If 
time does not allowa visit to all the cliffs on the north-west side, 
where the Guillemots and Kittiwakes chiefly congregate, the 
visitor would do well to follow the rough track on the top of 
the island to the north end, where he may see the large colony of 
Puffins and Razorbills, which to the bird-lover is perhaps the 
most interesting sight which can be obtained on this picturesque 
island. 


* At page 100, written by the Rev. Murray A. Mathew.—Ep. 


( 381.) 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


MAMMALTA. 


Lesser Shrew and Bank Vole in Berks.—I have never met with 
either of these little mammals in the part of Berkshire with which I am 
most familiar. Their congeners appear to be common enough. I should 
like to know whether either species has been satisfactorily identified as 
occurring in Berkshire. The Microtus glareolus, or Bank Vole, is no doubt 
found in Berkshire, though I have never chanced to come across it ; but as 
regards Sorex minutus (the Lesser Shrew), its occurrence is not so probable. 
Any information therefore would be welcome. — W. H. Warner (Fyfield, 
near Abingdon). 

AVES. 


Note on the Nesting Habits of the Sparrow-Hawk.— The Sparrow- 
Hawk (Accipiter nisus) is such a well-known bird that it seems hardly 
possible that any of its habits and ways should have escaped the notice of 
so many observers. Yet the following fact in the nesting economy of this 
Hawk still appears—as far as I know—to stand unrecorded. My know- 
ledge of the Sparrow-Hawk has been confined chiefly to the eastern part of 
Fifeshire, in Scotland, where the bird is common and generally met with. » 
When out looking for the eggs of the Long-eared Owl, in the latter days of 
March or the beginning of April, we used on these occasions to have a look 
round in those parts of the woods to which the Sparrow-Hawks returned 
from year to year with almost unfailing regularity for the purpose of rearing 
their young; and as a result of these observations we fuund that, though 
the Sparrow-Hawk does not, as a general rule (in Fife), begin to sit till the 
second or third week in May, she invariably begins to build her nest about 
the first week in April, or even, should the weather be warm, in the last 
days of March. At this time the outer rim only (composed, as a rule, of 
larch-twigs) of the nest is completed, and is so left until about a week before 
the laying of the first egg, when the bowl is added, this latter being gener- 
ally made of small birch-twigs, and lined with pieces of Scotch fir and bark 
about the size of a florin. The nest was invariably placed on a branch well 
out from the main trunk, though more rarely in the “ breek ” of the tree. 
The tail of the sitting bird was generally to be seen projecting over the 
edge of the nest. It would interest me to know if this strange nesting 


382 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


habit of the Sparrow-Hawk has been noticed elsewhere.—A. H. MBIKLE- 
JOHN (Highworth, Ashford, Kent). 


Nesting of the Hobby in Shropshire.—In ‘ The Zoologist ’ for March 
last (ante, p. 143), I noted that the Hobby (Falco subbuteo) nested in 1899 
near Ludlow. My friend Mr. J. Palmer, who originally found the nest, 
has just informed me that the pair have returned this year, and laid again 
in the identical spot. The eggs were taken June 30th, but, as last year, 
they have laid again, and are being allowed to rear the brood. The Hobby 
is known to return year after year to the same nest, but the habit is curious, 
inasmuch as it does not build a nest for itself. In this case the nest is an 
old Crow’s. Another pair of Hobbies are haunting the vicinity, and a male 
was shot five miles away on July 3rd. These three are probably the young 
reared there last year. I trust they may be spared.i—H. HK. Forrest 
(Bayston Hill, Shrewsbury). 


Curlew Nesting in Surrey.—I have just heard of a Curlew’s nest 
(Numenius arquata) being found in the spring of 1896 on Chobham Com- 
mon, about twenty-eight miles from London, two eggs from which are now 
in the possession of a Mr. Tice. Has the Curlew ever. been known to nest 
in Surrey before? I have seen the two eggs, and they are certainly those 
of a Curlew. —Spencer H. Le Marcuant (Chobham Place, Woking). 

[In Mr. Bucknill’s ‘ Birds of Surrey ’ it is stated that in 18938, ‘“ during 
the whole of the summer, a pair were noticed near Frensham, which probably 
had a nest on the moor (Streatjield in lit.).’— Ep. | 


Variations in the Notes and Songs of Birds in different Districts. — 
The above subject is one which seems to have been noticed very little by 
ornithologists ; in fact, I never remember seeing more than one reference 
at all to it. If this variation was slight, it would be possible for it not to 
have been noticed by naturalists ; but this is not so, the differences being 
so marked that I cannot believe it has escaped the notice of those who 
know all the notes and the song of all birds they have come in contact 
with. It does not appear to me to be a difference in the way the song is 
put together, but rather that the note is in a different key, and therefore the 
first time you hear it you are apt to be misled into believing it is entirely a 
different bird. If it were only in the resident bird that this variation 
existed, it might be explained by the climate; but this is not so, the 
differences being much more marked in the summer migrants than in the 
more resident species. Then, again, it does not exist in all birds, and the 
explanation of it puzzles me. Taking the two districts that I am best 
acquainted with—that is to say, Worcestershire and Co. Donegal—I will 
give the difference as it appearsto me. The notes and songs of all birds 
in which this variation exists are in a lower key in Donegal than Worcester- 


oe 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 383 


shire, and the birds in which it is most marked are the Cuckoo and the 
Whitethroat, the latter appearing at first to have an entirely different song. 
After these two the change is most marked in the Chaffinch, Hedge- 


Sparrow, Wren, and Blackbird; while in the Willow-Wren (the only other 
Warbler I have listened to in the west of Donegal) I could notice no change 
whatever. Comparing these two counties with the district round Loch 
Lomond, there is again a difference, and the Whitethroat is once more the 
most marked, appearing to have a song between the other two. I should be 
glad if others would give their experience. — H. E. Hawarp (Clarelands, 
Stourport). 
AMPHIBIA. 


- Rana temporaria in the Scilly Islands.—Previous to my taking a trip 
to the Scillies last month, I made some enquiries respecting their fauna, 


and was informed that no batrachians were recorded from these islands. I 


was fortunate, however, whilst on St. Mary’s, in taking an example of the 


Common Frog (Rf. temporaria), which, although in itself no rarity (being a 
_ very ordinary female of the reddish variety), was certainly an interesting 


capture for locality’s sake. It was taken on some boggy land (lying east of 
the town of St. Mary’s), known locally as ‘“‘the moors.” The islanders seem 
well acquainted with Frogs, but say they are rare. A boatman told me he 
remembered years ago seeing them spawning in a pond on Bryher Island. 
I visited this place, but without success. Whether their “ Frogs ” also 
includes Toads, I could not discover, but probably the same confusion exists 
between the two animals here as in other parts of the country. Newts 
appear to be quite unknown, as arealso Snakes and Lizards. It is probable 
that by carefully working suitable districts other batrachians may turn up, 
but unfortunately my time was too limited to do this.——F. W. TrERry 
(102, Kingston Road, Wimbledon, 8.W.). 

{Borlase, in his ‘ Observations on the Ancient and Present State of the 
Islands of Scilly,’ published in 1756, states:—‘‘ There is no Adder, or 
venomous creature of any kind to be found in these islands.” —Ep. | 


384 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


Text-book of Zoology, treated from a Biological Standpoint. By 
Dr. Otro Scumem. Translated from the German by 
RupotrH Rosenstock, M.A.; edited by J. T. Cunnine- 
HAM, M.A. Part I.—Mammals. Adam & Charles Black. 


Suc a series of publications on zoology—text-books, hand- 
books, introductions, manuals, &c. — is now appearing, that it 
seems only possible to suggest at present what shall be considered 
canonical, and what not. And this estimate becomes more difficult 
every day, especially when, as in the present work, the bionomical 
element is a pronounced feature; for now many brilliant, some 
hazardous, and a multitude of strange theories more or less enter 
the purview of every author. The editor—Mr. Cunningham— 
in his preface, opines that even in this volume, in reference to 
colouration, the author’s idea is perhaps carried toofar. But Dr. 
Schmeil advances no particular theory, and is anxious throughout 
to exhibit adaptability in structure to environmental conditions 
in a way that could have met with the approval of the—pre- 
sumably—defunct teleologist, that ought not to offend the 
strictest ‘“‘ selectionist,’ and may be countenanced by the ‘“‘neo- : 
Lamarckian.” 

But these remarks, though legitimate to a general considera- 
tion, in no way express the aim of the book, which is one of 
the most interesting and suggestive to place in the hands of 
school-children, to whom zoology is not an end, but a part of a 
liberal education. It has the merit of producing thought, rather 
than the necessity of remembering details. Most children can 
repeat that a Cat “has nine lives,” but how few can explain the 
operation of what is styled “always falling on its legs.” Dr. 
Schmeil comes to the rescue :—‘‘ When a man in falling tries to 
support himself on his arms, he may easily break them; for, as 
he possesses clavicles, and needs them, his arms are firmly 
(without elasticity) connected with the shoulder-girdle, so that 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 385 


the shock in falling is not diminished. The Cat, on the other 
hand, at every spring alights on the fore-legs. Fracture, how- 
ever, does not take place, because the shoulder-blades are only 
connected with the skeleton of the trunk by ligaments and 
muscles, and yield to the shock (prove on the living animal how 
easily the shoulder-blades can be moved), and also because yet 
another safeguard occurs in the shoulder-joint. When the weight 
_ of the body comes on the fore-legs, the angle between the upper 
arm and shoulder-blade is diminished, enlarging again when the 
bones return to their resting position. (Hence we understand 
why all swift-running and springing animals have no clavicles).” 
A similar element of practical reasoning is found throughout the 
whole ofthis excellent manual, “‘made in Germany,” and its 
illustrations will serve to interest as well as instruct. 


Introduction to Zoology. By Cuartes Brenepicr DAvENpPort, 
Ph.D., and GrertrRuDE Crotty Davenport, B.S. New 
York: The Macmillan Company, Ltd. 


Tuis publication is intended for the “use of secondary 
schools”; it “attempts to restore the old-time instruction in 
Natural History ’—in method; it is “‘ the outcome of a conviction 
that the needs of the secondary student are not best met by a 
course in comparative anatomy.” The book is described “as 
like a ‘Synoptic Room’ in the vestibule of a vast museum, 
containing the most essential things for those who can go in but 
a little way, but also fundamental for those who can penetrate 
farther.” 

It will thus be seen that the authors have set themselves 
one of the most difficult tasks in the domain of natural science. 
To really popularise zoology—and the word “ popularise ” is not 
synonymic with ‘“vulgarise””—requires the genius of a Huxley. It 
depends on knowing all, and having the faculty of stating clearly 
the one thing needful. To be a college professor is sometimes 
only the reward of tact and industry; to be a teacher of the 
people is a gift of the gods. After all, in secondary and other 
schools,. zoology will be best taught by the enthusiastic and 
competent teacher, who knows how to expound the text-books ; 


386 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


and this, combined with a fair-sized aquarium and vivarium in 
every school, and a weekly excursion with a good field naturalist, 
would do for children nearly as much as all the books. Like the 


people we all meet who quote from the Bible and Shakespeare - 


without ever reading one or the other, so we should have a 
generation growing up who were at least imbued with an interest in 
animal life. Once create the love of zoology, and all the rest will 
follow; a knowledge from books alone is always second-hand. 
One might as well expect an appreciation of art from Midas 
because he has purchased a picture gallery. 

This book is a means to an end, and will doubtless help on 
the work. It gives so much information that the space at disposal 
is not sufficient, in many cases, to elucidate the details, and 
hence the authors are often, like preachers, a little over the heads 
of their congregation. The illustrations are apt, but very often 
borrowed—though with all acknowledgment—and sometimes 
‘after Brehm.” Whether illustrations should be taken from the 
works of the taxidermist is a very open question, even when 
representing such excellent work as may be found in the Field 
Columbian Museum. Sometimes the text is a little vague, as 
when we read that ‘‘ the Crocodile in the strict sense is found in 
the Nile and other African rivers,” as well as in certain American 
localities, without any reference to its oriental habitats. 

As an appendix, there is a very useful and suggestive outline 
of laboratory work, and a bibliography of standard works. 


In Bird-land with Field-glass and Camera. By OLtiver G. PIKE. 
T. Fisher Unwin. | 


Ir under the pseudonym of scientific ornithology the ubi- 
quitous collector did much damage in “bird-land,” by the 
indiscriminate acquisition of eggs and nests, science seems now 
to have provided the antidote in the camera. The lovely photo- 
graphs of nests and eggs, true to nature, and possessing all the 
real charms of the environment, which now embellish ornitho- 
logical literature, will probably create a more exact knowledge of 
these objects, and prevent much unnecessary destruction. Better 
that the trade of the dealer should perish than that the birds must 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 387 


> 
ultimately vanish; though the worst destruction of eggs by 
human agency is, we are thoroughly convinced, occasioned by 
the boys of the village. 
Mr. Pike’s photographing-ground has been principally North 
- Middlesex and South Hertfordshire, and he has in this artistic 
_and harmless occupation acquired a very large experience of birds 
and their ways, which he has related in a small but charmingly 
illustrated book. The successful placing of the camera is largely 
_ dependent on the habits of his “sitters,” and not only the nest 
_ but the whole environment is reproduced on his plates. We read 
- with regret the usual story of vanishing species from once frequent 
haunts. He remembers “the time when it'was possible to see a 
- Sparrow-Hawk almost any day in our North Middlesex fields; 
but now a specimen is only seen at very long intervals; for, 
although I am constantly abroad in the open air, it is over a year 
since I saw one of these fine birds on the wing.” And again :— 
** Not very many years ago the Raven used to breed in our inland 
counties; and not far from my home there still stands a tree in 
which the last pair of these birds built their nest in Middlesex.” 
Although the collector becomes callous—and we plead guilty 
to the impeachment—most will regret the truth contained in 
‘Mr. Pike’s narrative concerning the Sky-lark :—‘‘It is pathetic 
to hear, as I have done, how this bird, which makes the country- 
side so enjoyable, will suddenly stop in the midst of its beautiful 
song when its nest far below is being robbed of its eggs. I was 
once a witness of this phenomenon, and felt sad as well as 
indignant.” It is probable that the greatest mystery of life is its 
sorrow; but with birds the camera will not increase it. 
As regards the beauty of the illustrations, we can refer to 
those reproduced in the present number in connection with Mr. 
Gurney’s paper. 


Bird Gods. By Cuartes DE Kay. With an Accompaniment of 
Decorations by G. W. Epwarps. Harry R. Allenson. 


Tue aim of this book is apparently to assert “ the influence 
of birds and beasts on what may be called prehistoric religion,” 
as against the more prevalent hypothesis that the planets, their 
satellites, and other natural phenomena have induced this specu- 


388 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


lative view. Theauthor asks “ whether the ‘primitive mind did 
not first invest the world of animals with mystery, because they 
are objects near at hand, within their limited horizon, and only 
afterwards rise to the point of grasping the heavenly bodies as 
being endowed with supernatural power ?”’ 

This is a purely mythological book, and, like all mythologists, 
the author must expect little sympathy when he fails to carry 
conviction. That disjointed but widely-spread custom, the cou- 
vade, the explanation of which has so perplexed anthropologists, 
is here sought to be divined by the aid of the habits of the 
Cuckoo, which, having been a pagan god, was afterwards “de- 
graded to a devil.” The Sphinx is considered as a. Greek 
embroidery upon the Owl, and the author remarks that ‘‘ we get 
thus an explanation of the sphinxes on the helmet of the great 
statue of Pallas Athené in the Parthenon, described by Pausanias. 
They were merely more elegant and artistic forms of the homely 
Owl, the bird of Minerva.” That birds have entered largely into - 
the old mythologies this book abundantly maintains with many 
valuable and apt references, but that they have played the part 
suggested for them by Mr. de Kay will, we venture to think, 
not be considered proven by all his readers. But, like the 
Phoenix, the best hypothesis usually arises from the ashes of. its 
predecessors. 

Whether the illustrations should be styled ‘‘ decorations,” as 
on the title-page, is altogether another question. Mr. Allenson’s 
name appears as representing the publisher on the title-page, but 
A. 8. Barnes & Co. is printed on the cover. 


ly 
e 


t 


: 
collector is placed in an independent position in regard to the number of 
_ Specimens he may collect in a day, as with its aid he can keep a number in 


( 389 ) 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 


-ForMaLpeHyDE as an aid in collecting ornithological specimens is the 
subject of a communication by Mr. Joseph Mailliard to the last number of 


: the ‘Auk’ for July. It appears that formalin can be procured at a much 


lower rate under the trade name of “formaldehyde.” By its aid the 


good condition until time admits of preparing them for his collection. With 


an old-fashioned veterinary hypodermic syringe, and a bottle of saturated 


~~ a 


solution of formaldehyde, Mr. Mailliard is now provided on all his expe- 


ditions. This syringe holds one teaspoonful, and this is sufficient for a bird 


as large as a Partridge. The sharp needle is punched into the abdomen 
in one or more places, a few drops are sent down the throat of a bird to be 


_ saved, and, if to be kept for some days, a little is injected into the brain by 


opening the bill and forcing the needle upwards and backwards between the 
eyeballs. In place of a regular hypodermic, a common glass syringe, or 
even an eye-dropper, can be made to answer, especially if the end is heated 
and drawn out to a sharp point, as inan egg-blower. The amount injected 
and the strength of the solution must depend upon the size of the bird. 
Formaldehyde comes in saturated solution of nominally 40 per cent., while 
from 4 per cent. to 10 per cent. is what may ordinarily be used. For birds 
up to the size of a Partridge, 4 per cent. is sufficiently strong; from this to 
the size of a Duck, 8 or 10 per cent. ; and for Geese and very large birds 
a comparatively smaller amount of the full strength seems more satisfactory 
than a larger amount of a weaker solution. It is well to avoid, as far as 
possible, having one’s hands come in contact with the strong solution, as 
this is apt to harden the skin of the fingers, and cause cracks, iuto which 


arsenic may be introduced. Upon the basis of the original solution being 


« 


40 per cent., it is a simple matter to approximate any desired strength by 
mixing in a separate bottle one part of the solution to so many parts of 
water roughly estimated. The strength and amount necessary for different 
birds will soon be learned with a little practice. If too much or too great 
a strength is used upon small birds, the body becomes more or less hardened 
and dry, making it exceedingly difficult to skin the specimen. Care must 
also be taken to avoid using more than is absolutely necessary in the throat, 
as the thinness of the gullet allows the formaldehyde to act directly upon 


390 THE ZOOLOGIST 


the skin of the neck, which is apt to become so stiff and dry as to cause it 
to tear in the effort to skin the bird over the head. A few drops only will 
suffice for the preservation of this part of the bird, except in the case of a 
large crop full of decomposing food. When properly treated with this 
solution, and properly cooled off in the first instance, birds will keep a week 
even in warm weather in sufficiently good condition to make a fair skin. 


Dr. AtpHa&us 8. Packarp, the well-known American entomologist, 
who is now in London, has ready for the press a volume entitled ‘“* Lamarck, 
the Founder of Evolution; his Life and Work. With Translations of his 
Writings on Organic Evolution.” Dr. Packard has sought and obtained 
much original material for his publication in France, and the work will 
probably be published in England. 


In connection with the above, it is interesting to know that Darwin’s 
great work, ‘ The Origin of Species,’ will be out of copyright in about a 
couple of years, and that the publisher has decided to issue during the 
coming autumn an edition in large type, well bound and well printed, at a 
price which will bring it within the reach of all—half-a-crown. 


THE monthly magazines still show by their contents that the ordinary 
reader is interested in the many curious details of animal life. In the 
June number of ‘ Pearson’s Magazine,’ René Bache writes on fish-culture 
in trains in the U.S.A., and describes the special railway-car used for the 
transportation of fry and eggs, under the direction of the national “ Fish 
Commission.” 

Supposing the car is drawn up at one of the Fish Commission’s central 
stations, and the captain of the car is to receive for transportation a cargo 
of 2,600,000 young Shad, and 400,000 Shad eggs ; as quickly as possible 
the newly-hatched Government Shad will be taken aboard in about one 
hundred cans resembling milk-cans, each contaiming 20,000 fish. The 
eggs, in similar shipping-cans, will be rapidly loaded ; the car will be 
attached to a train, and the journey will commence. The captain of the 
car and his four trained assistants must account for every one of the 
3,000,000 lives entrusted to their care. This is no light responsibility, for 
young fishes die on slight provocation, and it is not surprising that the 
captain in charge of them all should be fairly overwhelmed with urgent 
duties. He has already sent telegrams to the traffic manager of every line 
over which he is to pass, making arrangements for the hauling of the car, 
so that there shall not be a moment’s unnecessary delay. He has tele- 
graphed in advance to various points on the route for supplies of ice and 


| 


4 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 391 


water, and he has also prepared type-written instructions for. each of his 
subordinates, telling them their precise duties throughout the journey. 

As soon as they have been taken on board the young fish are at once 
examined, and the water in their cans is aerated. This is accomplished by 
drawing off a certain portion of the water into a suitable receptacle, dipping 
it up with a dipper, and letting it fall again, so as to mix air with it. Fresh 
water is added, and ice is put in to chill it to the proper temperature of 
60°, when it is returned to the can. This process occupies more than an 
hour, and must be repeated every two hours. If any of the young fishes 
are dead they sink to the bottom, and are taken out with a syphon tube. 

Meanwhile the 400,006 Shad eggs are transferred from the shipping. 
cans to the batteries of hatching-jars. The jars are put on shallow trays, 
which are placed over refrigerating tanks. There are forty-eight jars, each 
capable of hatching 100,000 eggs at one time. When the hatching appa- 


_ ratus has been set in operation it requires hardly any further attention, a 


continuous stream of water passing through the jars, and keeping the ova 
agitated. When hatched the young fish, being lighter than the water, pass 
out of the receptacles, through syphons, into glass aquaria, from which they 
may be taken with gauze nets when required. 

When the car reaches one of the places on its journey where a consign- 
ment of Shad is wanted, an attendant takes perhaps fifteen cans, containing 
300,000 fish, drives to the water that is to be stocked, and in the cool of the 
evening lowers the cans gently into the water, and releases his captives to 
their first experience of the world. ‘The chances are that one in ten will 
live to grow up ; the remainder will be eaten. 


AnytHine that relates to Gilbert White is of interest to naturalists, 
and when we have an article by Prof. Newton on “ Giloert White and his 
Recent Editors ” (‘ Macmillan’s Magazine,’ July) we know that we shall 
have sound views, with pungent criticism. And we are not disappointed. 
The last two editions are certainly not bepraised, and the opinion as to 
former editions will probably receive general acceptance, though editors 
have a rough time. As Prof. Newton severely observes :—‘“ The work 
itself has never suffered from its misusage by editors, of whom it has had 
so many, a few good, some indifferent, and several bad. If anything be 
needed to prove White’s right to be considered a naturalist of the first order, 
it may be found in the fact that his most ignorant editor has been unable 
to degrade him from that rank, and how ignorant some have been would 
take too long to tell.” Some, however, are “ regarded as experts, and their 
work therefore to have real value. Among them are such men as Blyth, 
Jardine, Rennie, and Bennett, the labours of the last two forming the 


392 THE ZOOLOGIST, 


foundation of the excellent edition (or editions, it must be said) of Mr. 
Harting; and the late Prof. Bell, who lived for forty years in what had 
been White’s house at Selborne, ana, possessing advantages far greater 
than any of his predecessors or successors, was able to give so much 
additional information that his edition still remains, and is likely for many 
years to remain, the standard. His biographical memoir, too, contains 
more numerous details of the author than had been before accessible ; but 
for a complete Life we must await that which his great-great-nephew, 
Mr. Holt-White, is understood to have in the press.” 


Mr. Frank T. BULLEN has written in the ‘Strand Magazine’ for July — 
on the subject of ‘ Sociable Fish.” On the question of the sociability of 
the Pilot-fish with the Shark, the author writes as follows :— 

** Does the Pilot-fish love the Shark? Does it even know that the Shark 
is a Shark, a slow, short-sighted, undiscriminating creature whose chief 
characteristic is that of never-satisfied hunger? In short, does the Pilot- 
fish attach itself to the Shark as a pilot, with a definite object in view, or is 
the attachment merely the result of accident? Let us see. 

‘‘ Here is a big Shark-hook, upon which we stick a mass of fat pork two 
or three pounds in weight. Fastening a stout rope to it we drop it over the 
stern with a splash. The eddies have no sooner smoothed away than we 
see the brilliant little blue and gold Pilot-fish coming towards our bait at 
such speed that we can hardly detect the lateral vibrations of his tail. 
Round and round the bait he goes, evidently in a high state of excitement, 
and next moment he has darted off again as rapidly as he came. He reaches 
the Shark, touches him with his head on the nose, and comes whizzing back 
again to the bait, followed sedately by the dull-coloured monster. As if 
impatient of his huge companion’s slowness, he keeps oscillating between 
him and the bait until the Shark has reached it, and without hesitation has 
turned upon his back to seize it, if such a verb can be used to denote the 
deliberate way in which that gaping crescent of a mouth enfolds the lump 
of pork. Nothing, you think, can increase the excitement of the little 
attendant now. He seems ubiquitous, flashing all round the Shark’s jaws 
as if there were twenty of him at least. But when half a dozen men, 
‘‘ tailing on ” to the rope, drag the Shark slowly upward out of the sea, the 
faithful little Pilot seems to go frantic with—what shall we call it ?—dread 
of losing his protector, affection, anger, who can tell? ‘The fact remains 
that during the whole time occupied in hauling the huge writhing carcase 
of the Shark up out of the water the Pilot-fish never ceases its distracted 
upward leaping against the body of his departing companion. And after the 
Shark has been hauled clear of the water the bereaved Pilot darts discon- 
solately to and fro about the rudder as if in bewilderment at its great loss.” 


THE ZOOLOGIST 


No. 711.—September, 1900. 


THE ADDER-SWALLOWING THEORY FROM AN 
ANATOMICAL POINT OF VIEW. 


By Geratp Leicuton, M.B. 


THE main objections of scientific naturalists to the belief that 
the Adder-mother (Vipera berus) swallows her young are the fol- 
lowing :—First, that no Adder has been dissected by a competent 
authority with the young found in the gullet. Secondly, that the 
cubic capacity of the gullet is not sufficient to hold all the young 
ones in a litter. Thirdly, some (F. G. Aflalo, e.g.) hold that 
there is no adequate reason for the phenomenon, i.e. that the 
young ones would have a better chance of escape if they were not 
thus swallowed. Of these objections, the second is by far the 
most pressing to my mind, for if it could be shown that the gullet 
of the Adder is not capacious enough to hold the average number 
of young, then indeed one could not have much belief in the 
occurrence. It is this point that I wish to deal with at present. 

One must settle— 
| 1st. What is the average number of young at a birth ? 

2nd. Is the anatomical structure of the gullet adapted for the 
reception of young ? 

3rd. Is the capacity of the gullet sufficient ? 

These are practical questions, only capable of decision by 
dissection of a sufficient number of adult female Adders. ‘Take 
them seriatim. 

Zool, 4th ser. vol. IV., September, 1900. 2E 


394 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Ist. The average number of young Adders at a birth. 


Various authorities give different figures: thus Dr. Stradling 
puts the litter at from 15 to 40, M. C. Cooke at 10 to 20. My 
own experience leads me to doubt very seriously whether Adders 
ever have forty young at once. I have dissected now a consider- 
able number of full-grown female Adders in young (three this 
week), one of which I will now describe in detail. | 

Dissection of Gravid Female.x—On Monday, July 28rd, I dis- 
sected a large gravid female Adder for the purpose of counting 
the number of young that had developed. A mesial incision was 
made from the position of the ovaries to the cloaca, and the skin 
turned outwards. Both oviducts were full of eggs. The upper 
and lower ends of the oviducts were tied with string, and the 
other organs gently separated. Both oviducts were then lifted 
out of the body cavity. The dissection showed the blood supply 
very beautifully, and the young were evidently only a day or two 
from birth. I took a photo of the full oviducts, as one cannot 
often get an Adder at this stage. The right oviduct contained 
seven and the left six eggs. (An egg often contains two embryos.) 
The specimen was such a perfect one that I thought I would pre- 
serve it in toto to harden, so as to observe later the precise 
position of the embryo in the egg. This being so, I could not 
be quite certain as to their number, but I think it is 19 or 20. 
The average of this series of dissections works out at thirteen 
embryos to each female Adder. (The eggs often contain more 
than one embryo; in this latter case there were thirteen eggs 
containing the eighteen embryos.) Possibly a larger series of 
dissections might give slightly different results, but I do not 
think the difference is likely to be great. To be on the safe side 
(as far as the question of capacity is concerned), let us consider 
the average to be jifteen. 


2nd. The anatomical fitness of the gullet for their reception. 


This is soon disposed of, as the Adder’s gullet is, of course, 
adapted to its food. There is no difficulty whatever for a Mouse, 
a young Water Vole, or a Blindworm to pass into the gullet, and 
it is quite easy to press them out again if they are contained 
therein. (A short time ago I killed an Adder which appeared 


ie oe oo 


THE ADDER-SWALLOWING THEORY. 395 


i very full in the throat, and, on gentle pressure, I got out two 
young Water Voles.) The mechanism of the jaws is indeed 


peculiarly fitted for the passage of bulky articles of food, a feature 
common to the Ophidia group. 


3rd. The cubic capacity of the esophagus (gullet). 


This is a crucial point. If the Adder does swallow her young 


it is to be presumed that there must be room in every average- 
sized Adder’s gullet for an average-sized family. The capacity 


of the gullet can be estimated by the simple process of dilating 


it to its full extent with air through a blowpipe. I did this in 
the presence of a naturalist last week ; his comment was, ‘‘ There 
is room for twenty young ones, but for forty I think not.” The 


_ average length of the gullet is 9 in., and the average diameter, 


when distended, 1 in., the average circumference 34 in. Young 
Adders can curl themselves up in a remarkable way, and I have 
no hesitation in saying that the capacity of the esophagus is 
sufficient to hold the young. My conclusion is that, theoretically 
considered, there is no anatomical reason why the Addeyr- 


swallowing theory should not be true. 
2E2 


396 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


The third objection I alluded to, viz. that there is no need 
for the process, is a mere matter of opinion. Very curious in- 
stances could be given of the expression of maternal instincts 
in nature. 

It only remains, then, for the first objection to be removed, 
viz. that a competent authority should have the opportunity of 
dissecting an Adder which has been observed to swallow the 
young. Until this is done scientific naturalists will continue to 
regard the question as one capable of proof, if true, but hitherto 
unproved. ' 


( 397 ) 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH AND ig 
NEIGHBOURHOOD. 


By Arruur PAtrTeERson. 


(Continued from p. 172.) 


The arrangement and nomenclature of Howard Saunders in 
his ‘ Manual of British Birds’ has been adopted in the following 
catalogue. 


ABBREVIATIoNS.—C. means common; F. frequent; F. C. fairly 
common; N. U. not uncommon; N. C. not common; F. fre- 
quent; L. L. lessening locally; S. scarce; R. R. rather rare ; 
R. rare; A. accidental. B. of N. means ‘ Birds of Norfolk’ 
(Stevenson) ; B. of S. means ‘Birds of Suffolk’ (Babington) ; 
Nor. N. S. means ‘ Transactions’ of the Norfolk and Norwich 
Naturalists’ Society. 


Turdus viscivorus. Mistle-'Thrush.—L. L. Nested in market- 
gardens until end of seventies. Young birds from surrounding 
villages frequent the sand-dunes in the early autumn, seeking 
insects. Some scattered mulberry trees (themselves extirpated) 
were at one time an attraction. Buff variety shot, June 18th, 1898. 
Local, ‘‘ Fulfer.”’ 

T. musicus. Song-Thrush.—C. Additions in autumn. Its 
services in autumn in destroying the Coleoptera and Limacide 
on strawberry-beds are not appreciated by country gardeners. 

T. iliacus. Redwing.—C. Numbers depend upon severity of 
winter. In-winters of 1878 and 1881 were starving by thousands. | 
Caught by boys with their caps in the streets. Local, “ French 
Mavish.” 

T. pilaris. Fieldfare.—C. Numbers fluctuate with weather. 
In mild winters very few. November, 1891, thousands on neigh- 
bouring marshes. Found several dead on 8th on the beach. 
Example washed up on. April 23rd, 1893; undoubtedly a late 
emigrant, Local, “ French Fulfer,” 


398 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


T. varius. White’s Thrush.—A. A male example obtained 
at Hickling, Oct. 10th, 1871. This, the only Norfolk specimen, 
is in Norwich Museum. 

T. merula. Blackbird.—C. Appears to be on the increase. 
Occasionally great numbers arrive in autumn. Have met with 
cream, buff, and mottled varieties. 

T. torquatus. Ring-Ouzel.—R.R. Occurs in spring; less 
rarely in autumn. At one time not infrequent on North Denes, 
haunting the furze, amongst which Helix nemoralis was abundant. 
Nest discovered at Horsey by late Mr. Rising in May, 1855, con- 
taining four eggs. A second nest subsequently. (Nor. N.S.). 

Saxicola enanthe. Wheatear.—C. Scarcer than formerly ; 
nesting at one time on North Denes, and occasionally now on 
neighbouring warrens. Immature birds fairly common towards 
September; then patrol the shore catching dipterous insects, 
which swarm at the high-water mark. Mr. E. Saunders had a 
pied variety, September, 1898. Unusually numerous, spring of 
1899. Local, ‘‘ White-rump”’; “ Shepherd-bird.” 

Pratincola rubetra. Whinchat.—L.L. Used formerly to be 
abundant on North Denes, nesting there. Local, “* Furzechuck.” 

P, rubicola. Stonechat. — L. L.—Formerly fairly abundant 
on North Denes. Local, ‘‘ Furzechuck.”’ 

Ruticilla phenicurus. Redstart.— F. More frequently observed 
in autumn in the neighbourhood of North Denes. Local, ‘ Fire- 
tail.” 

R. titys. Black Redstart. R.R.—First observed as a county 
visitant, Oct. 3lst, 1848. Adult female shot on North Denes. 
Two others following year; several since. I picked up an 
example, killed by telegraph-wires, same locality, Oct. 18th, 1898. 

Cyanecula suecica. Bluethroat. — R. An adult male was 
found dead on the beach, Sept. 21st, 1841; and another at 
Lowestoft in May, 1856. A local gunner, “seeking for any 
small bird, just to empty his gun at,” killed a specimen on Breydon 
walls in September, 1883. Another recorded at Horsey, 1885. 

Erithacus rubecula.- Redbreast.—C. Additional numbers in 
autumn. I have seen it arrive on the coast. 

Daulias luscinia. Nightingalee— F. Not uncommon at 
Fritton, and in neighbourhood of Belton. I have observed it on 
a tree-trunk warbling in broad daylight, 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 399 


Sylvia cinerea. Whitethroat.—C. Abundant in summer all 
over the neighbourhood. 

S. curruca. Lesser Whitethroat.—R. R. By no means so 
plentiful as S. cinerea. 

S. atricapilla. Blackcap.—S. Occasionally observed in 
market-gardens, and near Fritton. 

S. hortensis. Garden-Warbler.—S. Less often seen than 
even the Blackcap. 

S. undata. Dartford Warbler.—R. Has twice been seen on 
North Denes. The second example was caught by a dog in a 
furze-bush, Feb. 25th, 1859 (B. of N.). In 1884 Sir Edward 
Newton saw one at Lowestoft. 

Regulus cristatus. Golden-crested Wren.—C. Immense 
numbers arrive in autumn, usually first week in October, as was 
particularly the case in October, 1882, and again in October, 
1898. Fishing-boats often swarmed with tired birds. Local, 
 Herring-spink.” 

fi. ignicapillus. Fire-crested Wren.—-R. Two or three times 
observed in the neighbourhood. A male in market-gardens, 
April, 1889. One caught on a smack at sea, December, 1881. 

Phylloscopus rufus. Chiffchaff.—C. Used to be abundant in 
market-gardens in March. 

P. trochilus. Willow-Wren.—C. Frequently seen and heard 
in neighbourhood on spring migration. A singular variety of a 
uniform pale yellow, becoming straw-coloured below, killed near » 
Lowestoft in August, 1861 (B. of N.). 

Acrocephalus streperus. Reed-Warbler.—F.C. Met with in 
the Broadland district ; its name suggests its habitat. ‘The nest 
has been observed at Ranworth, built in laurel-bushes by the 
water’s edge (B. of N.). 

A. phragmitis. Sedge-Warbler.—C. Found in every “ carr,” 
reed-clump, and waterside thicket. Heard at intervals night and 
day ‘‘chitty cha-ing” by the idler on the broads and rivers. 
Local, “‘ Reed-bird.”’ 

Locustella nevia. Grasshopper-Warbler.—R. ‘“‘ Occasionally 
met with, but rare”? (Paget). As a county visitant it is by no 
means numerous. 

L. lusciniodes. Savi’s Warbler.—A. A nest of this species 
is said to have been found near Yarmouth, which was sent to 
Mr. Newcome’s collection at Feltwell (B. of N. vol, 1, p. 118). 


400 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Accentor modularis. Hedge-Sparrow.—C. More frequent in 
town gardens in winter, when its familiar notes are frequently heard. 

A. collaris. Alpine Accentor.—A. On Sept. 2Ist, 1894, I 
met with an example on Gorleston pier. It was feeding amongst 
the weeded pile-stumps and stones under the pier, and allowed 
me to approach it very closely, when I carefully observed its 
plumage and actions for some time through my glasses. Mr. 
Stevenson (B. of N. vol. i. p. 90) has not included this species, 
but refers to Mr. Lubbock as having seen one in 1824 on a 
grass-plot at Oulton, near Lowestoft. He refers to one other 
only for the eastern counties. 

Cinclus aquaticus. Dipper.—R. An example shot on Brey- 
don walls in 1849 (Nor. N. S. vol. iv. p. 269). 

C. melanogaster. Black-breasted Dipper.—R. An example 
of this Scandinavian form obtained on the River Bure, Nov. 9th, | 
1896 (Nor. N.S. vol. vi. p. 506). 

Panurus biarmicus. Bearded Titmouse. — F. Nests de- 
creasing on the Broads; mercilessly persecuted by broadmen and 
others. Hight killed by duckshot, brought to market Nov. 19th, 
1890; seven of these mutilated specimens still unsold on the 
22nd. Four killed at Filby ; on sale Feb. 1st, 1895. Mr.J. H. 
Gurney (Nor. N. S. vol. vi. p. 429) estimates ratio of local nests 
as follows :—1848, 160 ;* 1858, 140; 1868, 125; 1878, 90; 1888, 
45; 1898, 33. Is locally known as the “ Reed-pheasant.”’ 

Acredula caudata. Long-tailed Titmouse.—C. A regular 
although uncertain visitor in autumn. Resident and migratorial. 
Hundreds in town gardens, Oct. lst, 1899. The Rev. Churchill 
Babington says the White-headed Long-tailed Tit has been met 
with in Norfolk, probably referring to the neighbourhood of 
Yarmouth. 

Parus major. Great Titmouse. —C. Often numerous in 
early winter; this increase points to a migratorial influx. Has 
been secured on lightships. ‘‘ An apparently (return) migratory 
movement was observed at Yarmouth in February, 1848” (B. of N. 
vol. 1. p. 140). 

P. britannicus. Coal-Titmouse.—F. C. I saw a large flock 
near the sea, on the North Denes, Nov. 5th, 1898. Suspecting 
they were immigrants, possibly P. ater. 


* Mr. Gurney has since estimated the number of nests for this year as 
170 (cf. ante, p. 363).—Ep. 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 401 


P. palustris. Marsh-Titmouse.—F.C. I have no doubt - 


_ this species is migratorial. Found on the marshy districts north 


and south of the town. 

P. ceruleus. Blue Titmouse.-—C. Much more in evidence 
in late autumn than at any other time. Local, ‘‘ Pick-cheese.” 

P. cristatus. Crested Titmouse.— A. In the autumn of 
1888 or 1889 (date unfortunately lost), I saw a bird which was 
unmistakably of this species among the firs on Caister Road. I 
had a gun at the time, and made two unsuccessful attempts to 
assassinate it with big shot. I followed it from tree to tree ; be- 
coming myself fast upon a nail protruding from a rail, it eluded 
me whilst endeavouring to extricate my nether garment. Has not 
hitherto been obtained in Norfolk. Has occurred, according to 
Babington, in Suffolk. 

Sitta cesia. Nuthatch.—R.R. Not uncommon in the Fritton 
woods and neighbourhood. 

Troglodytes parvulus. Wren.—C. ‘The autumnal additions 
appear to strike the coast higher up, and to work southward by 
land; then not in any numbers. Local, ‘Jenny Wren.” 

Certhia familiaris. Tree-Creeper.—R.R. Have observed it 
in the Fritton district. 

Motacilla lugubris. Pied Wagtail.—C. Although not so 
numerous with us as formerly, a few remain in winter, a number 
arriving from the south in spring. Local, ‘‘ Penny Wagtail.” 

M. alba. White Wagtail.—R. ‘Two male examples obtained 
here on April 24th, 1888; a third on May Ist of the same year; 
another was taken alive at Lound, April 25th, 1896, and lived for 
some time in confinement. 

M. melanope. Grey Wagtail.—R. The Messrs. Paget speak 
of it as not uncommon in winter. I have observed it in late 
autumn, recognizing it by its longer tail and more dipping flight 
as compared with others of this family. An example feeding 
against my boat-house doors, Dec. 27th, 1899. 

M. flava. Blue-headed Wagtail.—R. Mr. E. T. Booth 
watched some on the edge of Breydon (Nor. N.8.). The second 
for the county was shot in April, 1851. One or two others recorded 
for district. Nest containing four eggs found at Herringfleet, 
June 16th, 1842, attributed to this species by the late Mr. Fisher. 

M. raii. Yellow Wagtail.—C. Abundant in some years on 


402 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


marshlands. Males arriving “yellow as a guinea,” by autumn 
have assumed a dingy hue. 

Anthus trivialis. Tree-Pipit—F.C. Has occasionally been 
taken in market-gardens. Also observed in neighbourhood of 
Belton. 

A. pratensis. Meadow-Pipit.—C. More numerous in winter 
than in summer; frequenting salt marshes. Young birds in 
autumn often seen catching “‘ sand-flies”’ at the high-water mark 
in company with young Sazxicola enanthe. Local, ‘‘ Titlark.”’ 

A. campestris. Tawny Pipit.—R. A female caught in a 
clap-net on North Denes, Oct. 7th, 1897. One at Lowestoft, 
Sept. 2nd, 1889 (Nor. N.S. vol. vi. p. 508). 

A. richardi. Richard’s Pipit—R. Several times taken or 
shot on North Denes: three respectively in November, 1841 ; 
April, 1842; and April, 1843. Mr. Babington records occur- 
rences as follows :—One, marshes at Yarmouth, Dec. 26th, 1866; 
another, Dec. 27th; a third, Dec. 29th. The last occurrence 
was on Dec. 11th, 1894. 

A. obscurus. Rock-Pipit.—F.C. Ihave frequently observed 
this species in autumn on the Bure and Breydon flint-faced walls. 
Have never seen it beside other than salt water. 

A. rupestris. Scandinavian Rock-Pipit.—R. Mr. Booth 
secured an example at Horsey in March, 1871 (Nor. N.S. vol. iv. 
p. 277). 

Oriolus galbula. Golden Oriole.—R. Has rarely put in an 
appearance in summer. A female killed near Yarmouth, Aug. Ist, 
1850; another, probably the male, seen at the same time (B. of N.). 
Mr. E. T. Booth (‘Catalogue of Birds’) says he had seen nest 
and eggs in Norfolk. I have some recollection of a pair 
attempting to nest near Ormesby in the early eighties. One seen 
at Burgh Castle, May, 1883. 

Lanius excubitor. Great Grey Shrike.—R.R. Visits us 
rarely in late autumn. Three or four met with January and 
February, 1891. One I kept alive, quickly became tame, taking 
his bath very soon after capture. 

LL. minor. Lesser Grey Shrike.-—R. One shot in the spring 
of 1869; another taken in May, 1875. Both of them adults. 
(Nor. N.S.). 

L. collurio. Red-backed Shrike.—R. R. Nested on North 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 408. 


Denes up till the eighties. Have observed it feeding on the 
Field Vole (Microtus agrestis). Have observed young birds once 
since. Less frequent than formerly. Local, ‘“‘ Butcher-bird.” 

L. pomeranus. Woodchat Shrike.-—R. An example obtained 
at Bradwell, April, 1829; another, April 29th, 1859 ; anda third, 
May, 1885. One also at Gorleston. 

Ampelis garrulus. Waxwing.—R.R. An uncertain winter 
visitor. In some years arrives in most unexpected numbers; in 
others few, if any, are recorded. Early in 1893, several obtained 
in neighbourhood. 

Muscicapa grisola. Spotted Flycatcher.—F. Have observed 
it darting at passing flies from a gravestone in Yarmouth church- 
yard, returning again to its look-out to watch for others. 

M., atricapilla. Pied Flycatcher.—R. R. Unusual numbers 
observed on North Denes, June Ist, 1898. 

M. parva. Red-breasted Flycatcher.—A. An immature 
female shot at Rollesby, Dec. 12th, 1896; the fourth example 
for the county, two of the others occurring in September, the 
third in October. 

Hirundo rustica. Swallow.—C. Less frequently nesting in 
town; its nests are common enough in the pump-mills dotting 
the marshes, where they are found variously shaped, sometimes 
like a saucer on top a beam, at another fitting a hole formed by 
the crumbling of a brick. In 1878 a pair nested in the hold of a 
hulk, full of water, in the centre of Breydon, successfully rearing 
their young. 

Chelidon urbica. Martin.—C. Have almost altogether for- 
saken the town through the persecution of the Sparrows, and 
from the constant destruction of their nests from the mud being 
rendered unstable, the roads being watered with sea-water. 

Cotile riparia. Sand-Martin.—C. Last nested in sand-hills on 
North Denes in 1879. Great numbers come into the vicinity of 
the town in autumn; frequents the beach during westerly winds, 
seeking insects. Have found its nest in the Gorleston sand-cliffs 

lined with Flustra folicea and Gull’s feathers. 
1 Ligurinus chloris. Greenfinch.— C. Much persecuted by 
gardeners at radish-sowing-time, when, in company with Chaf- 
finches, pilfering the beds. Augmented by arrivals in autumn, 
but they appear to strike the coast some miles north of Yarmouth, 


404 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


working, with other Passeres, southward along the sand-hills. 
Local, ‘‘ Green Linnet.”’ 

Coccothraustes vulgaris. Hawfinch.—F. Visits us in un- 
certain numbers every winter. Have every reason to believe a 
pair tried to nest in a market-garden a few years ago, but were 
killed by a birdcatcher. 

Carduelis elegans. Goldfinch.—L.L. Owing to incessant 
persecution by birdcatchers has so diminished of late years as to 
become almost a rarity with us. A hybrid between Goldfinch 
and Linnet netted at Acle, Sept. 4th, 1899. 

Chrysomitris spinus. Siskin. —C. An uncertain autumn 
visitor, sometimes arriving in great numbers. 

Serinus hortulanus. Serin Finch—R. A male example shot 
at Yarmouth, June 13th, 1885; another netted on North Denes, 
Feb. 5th, 1887. A pair, April Ist, 1897 (Nor. N.S.). 

Passer domesticus. House-Sparrow.— C. A great number 
repair all through the autumn to a clump of trees near St. 
Nicholas Church towards sunset, and chirp in chorus half an 
hour, making a great uproar, after which they disperse to their 
sleeping-quarters. Very destructive in villages around at harvest- 
time. One passed me within arm’s length on Jan. 17th, 1881, 
coming from over sea with tired-out Twites, Linnets, &. Iam 
informed that during immigration some occasionally alight on 
lightships. My informant, an ‘intelligent lightsman, on my 
suggesting he may possibly have mistaken Tree-Sparrows, dis- 
tinctly referred to them as ‘“ House’”’-Sparrows, which he knew 
from P. montanus. 

P. montanus. Tree-Sparrow.— F.C. Nests in the neigh- 
bourhood ; I have found its nest under a tile in cart-shed. Have 
observed it arrive in October, alighting on sand-hills to rest after 
a tiring flight across seas. 

Fringilla celebs. Chaffinch.—C. Great numbers arrive in 
autumn, many often perishing. Have observed it industriously 
feeding in winter on the seeds of Astor tripolium. 'The separa- 
tion of the sexes is noticeable. Local, ‘‘ Spink.”’ 

F. montifringilla. Brambling.—C. In some winters abun- 
dant. Winter of 1885-86 very numerous; again in 1894-95. 
Many dozens were caught by one birdcatcher who baited a certain 
meadow. Mr. J. H. Gurney (Nor. N.S. vol. iv. p. 278) refers to 


ee ee ae oe are tel 
al 4 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 405 


a rare “variety with a white chin, like a chevril Goldfinch,” as 
having been killed at Yarmouth, where the black-chinned variety 
has also sometimes occurred. 

Acanthis cannabina. Linnet.—C. Formerly nested in num- 
bers on North Denes. Great accessions to numbers in October, 
when thousands are netted and sent to London.. The female is 
generally killed, or saved, with Twites, &c., for shooting matches. 
Hybrids between the Linnet and Greenfinch have been taken two 
or three times. 

A. linaria. Mealy Redpoll. —F.C. In uncertain numbers 
visits us with the autumnal inrush. Unusually numerous, autumn 
of 1893. 

A.rufescens. Lesser Redpoll.—C. This species occasionally 
comes over in great numbers with Linnets, Twites, &c. 

A. flavirostris. ‘Twite.— C. In some years arrives in 
enormous flocks, and annoys the birdcatchers by their per- 
sistency in entering the clap-nets. Local, ‘‘ French Linnet.” 

Pyrrhula europea. Bullfinch,— F.C. Relentlessly shot, 
our market-gardeners assuming it to be unpardonably mis- 
chievous in orchards. It is apparently more numerous on the 
Suffolk side of the district. Local, ‘‘ Blood-ulf.” 

P. major. Russian Bullfinch.—A. A male was shot on the 
Denes near Yarmouth on Jan. 22nd, 1893 (Nor. N.8.). York- 
shire is the only other county in which the Russian Bullfinch has 
been at present identified. 

[P. enucleator.. Pine-Grosbeak.— A. A flight supposed to 
have been seen on the Denes, November, 1822 (vide Paget). 
Mr. J. H. Gurney thinks this very doubtful.] 

Loxia curvirostra. Crossbill.—F. Small flocks occasionally 
arrive in autumn. Several were seen for several weeks at Somer- 
ton and Belton quite into the nesting season. Largest influx for 
many years past, first week in Aug. 1898, when Lowne had thirty- 
two in for preservation. Paying great attention to cherry trees 
and gooseberry bushes. I saw several both “‘red”’ and “ green.” 
Mr. Dye kept one in a cage six and a half years. A variety of 
the Crossbill which was erroneously recorded at the time as the 
Two-barred Crossbill was probably Loxia rubrifasciata. 

L. bifasciata. Two-barred Crossbill.— A. On Sept. Ist, 
1889, a male example was shot at Burgh Castle, near Yarmouth 


406 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


(Nor. N.S.). An example of the American variety (L. leucoptera) 
is said to have been taken on the rigging of a vessel which arrived 
at Yarmouth in October, 1870 (vide B. of N. vol. 111. p. 413). 

Emberiza miliaria. Corn-Bunting.—F. C. Not often observed 
in this immediate neighbourhood. 

E. citrinella. Yellow Bunting. —C. Formerly nested on 
North Denes. Receives additions in winter from the more 
northern counties. A very conspicuous tenant of the hedgerows 
during winter. Local, “ Guler”’; ‘‘ Yellowhammer.” 

E. cirlus. Cirl Bunting.—R. Two specimens of this bird 
were obtained by Mr. E. T. Booth at Hickling in the autumn of 
1875 (Nor. N.8.). Two males netted on Breydon marshes during 
severe frost, Jan. 29th, 1888. (Ibid.) 

E. hortulana. Ortolan Bunting.—A. An example netted at 
Yarmouth, April, 1866 (B. of N.). Six are said to have been 
caught here in May, 1871. One, Lowestoft Denes, May 5th, 1859. 

E. scheniclus. Reed-Bunting.—C. Abundant in the neigh- 
bourhood of the rivers and broads. I remember several years 
ago seeing an osier-carr near Acle swarming with them in late 
autumn; possibly migratory arrivals. Local, ‘‘ Reed-Sparrow.” 

Calcarius lapponicus. Lapland Bunting.—N. C. Migrants 
arrive every winter in greater or less numbers. In October and 
November, 1892, considerable numbers seen and caught on North 
Denes. Over fifty taken or shot. More seen in 1893. Are now 
looked for by birdecatchers, who are not slow to observe dis- 
tinguishing peculiarities of possible strangers.. They mix freely 
with Snow-Buntings. 

Plectrophenax nivalis. Snow-Bunting.—C. In some winters 
abundant on the marshes and North and South Denes. On the 
former they industriously feed on the seeds of Astor tripolium ; 
on the latter, on those of various ‘‘ dune” plants uncovered by 
the varying winds. Earliest recorded arrival, Sept. 11th, 1897, 
at Belton. Local, ‘Snow-bird”; ‘ Snow-bunting”; ‘‘Snow- 
men.” 

Sturnus vulgaris. Starling.—C. It is most interesting to see 
in autumn continual parties arriving to roost on the reeds towards 
sunset in the broadlands. The huge flocks that used to wheel 
in aerial manceuvrings over the marshes are not now so frequently 
seen. Immense numbers arrive in autumn. Itis a common thing 


— a ee ee 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 407 


to hear the Starlings on town chimneys most accurately mimicking 
the Curlew, Golden Plover, &c. It is often seen hovering over 
Breydon with Gulls, picking up floating refuse ; and in summer 
sometimes aping Swallows catching insects on the wing. In 
September, 1899, an escaped Molothrus bonariensts attached itself 
for some time to a flock of Starlings, which its black colour 
closely resembled. 

Pastor roseus. Rose-coloured Starling.—R. Paget records 
three: one shot by Capt. Manby near the hospital, April, 1820; 
a fine male shot at Lound in June, 1851; a female was obtained 
at Yarmouth in September, 1856. 

Nuctfraga caryocatactes. Nutcracker.— R. One shot at 
Rollesby, Oct. 30th, 1844 ; another shot off Yarmouth, Oct. 7th, 
1853 (Nor. N.S. vol. iv. p. 283). 

Garrulus glandarius. Jay.—L.L. Still found and per- 
secuted in the wooded districts south of Yarmouth. 

Pica rustica. Magpie.—L. L. Frequenting same locality as 
the Jay, has meted out to it the same fate. When living in 
Dublin, in 1890, I was surprised at the tame audacity of this 
species, which seemed somewhat numerous in Phcenix Park. At 
the Gardens they would alight near one’s seat, and snap up tit- 
bits thrown to them. 

Corvus monedula. Jackdaw.— Nests in one or two village 
churches north of Yarmouth; used to nest in the chimney of a 
high old house in heart of the town. On its recent demolition I 
saw in a niche about twenty well-preserved skeletons of young 
birds. Great numbers arrive with other Corvide. Early morn- 
ing flights usually fly high and noisily. Some flying north, 
Feb. 17th, 1892. 

C. corax. Raven.—A. ‘Now rarely seen”’ (Paget). I have 
recognized it only on one or two occasions flying overhead in 
autumn. 

C. corone. Carrion-Crow. —L. L. Have occasionally met 
with it on Breydon flats, where Rooks also at times congregate 
in some numbers. 

C. cornix. Hooded Crow.—C. Great numbers usually pass 
over in autumn, many locating for the winter in the neighbour- 
hood. In severe weather becomes predaceous; have then known 
it seize wounded birds in presence of the gunners. Six observed 


408 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


on the marshes as early as June 22nd, 1896 ; while in 1894 I saw 
seven on July 31st. Great gathering on Breydon mud-flats prior 
to leaving, on March 31st, 1898. Local, “ Grey Crow” ; ‘‘ Kentish 
Crow.” 

C. frugilegus. Rook.—C. Apparently increasing. Not much 
molested, as the natives have formed a better opinion of it than 
formerly. Great flights from over sea in autumn. On some 
days, as on Nov. 2nd and 8rd, 1899, incessant streams all day 
long; arriving also after dark. Many assume omnivorous ten- 
dencies, patrolling the shore and mud-flats for edible refuse. I 
once saw one catch a “ Tartar” in a live Crab, which seized it by 
the throat. Have observed departures from Scratby cliffs in 
March. In April, 1896, several visited a tree near the market- 
place. A pair nested, but the young being disturbed, they have 
not since attempted to nest there. 

Alauda arvensis. Sky-Lark.—C. All the year round. Enor- 
mous influxes of a dark (Scandinavian) form in autumn. A note- 
worthy invasion on Feb. 3rd, 1897, when coarse weather from 
south-east followed. During protracted snows in November, 
1890, cabbages in surrounding gardens were reduced to shreds by 
them ; at Belton, during open weather in October, 1896, cabbage 
patches were ruined by them. 

A. arborea. Wood-Lark.—F.C. Mostly observed here in 
severe weather, in small parties. Seven shot in the snow bya 
gardener, Dec. 20th, 1890. 

[A. brachydactyla. Short-toed Lark.—A. One stated to have 
been shot on Breydon walls, Nov, 7th, 1889. The bird in question 
may have been an escape (vide B. of N. vol. iii. p. 410).] 

Otocorys alpestris. Shore-Lark.— F.C. Uncertain winter 
visitor ; sometimes occurs in considerable numbers, as in October, 
1880. Consorts with Snow-Buntings on North Denes and sand- 
hills. The birdcatchers have learnt to distinguish its call-note 
and characteristics, and look for it yearly. About sixty were 
_ obtained during autumn and winter of 1882, mostly males. 

Cypselus apus. Swift.—C. The numbers nesting here do 
not increase, although gathering in considerable numbers over the 
Denes in early autumn. A favourite prey is the St. Mark’s Fly 
(Bibio marci). During a set-in of unusually cold weather in 
August, 1881, numbers of Swifts were picked up dead or benumbed. | 
Local, ‘* Davelin.” 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 409 


C. melba, Alpine Swift——A. One shot on Smith’s marsh, 
Breydon walls, by Alfred Andrews, Sept. 4th, 1872. It was 
‘stuffed badly by Harvey, restuffed by James Carter, and again 
restuffed by Gunn. 
 Caprimulgus europeus. Nightjar.—F.C. Occasionally seen 
in recreation-ground near the beach moth hunting. 
Iynzx torquilla. Wryneck—N.C. In the Paget’s list it is 
referred to as “not uncommon.” Have seen examples from 
; Fritton Wood. Local, “ Cuckoo’s Mate.” 
Gecinus viridis. Green Woodpecker. —N.C. Occasionally 
brought to market. Nests at Fritton. 
_ Dendrocopus major. Great Spotted Woodpecker. —- N.C. 
‘Migrates hither occasionally in some numbers. I obtained one 
caught alive on a fishing-lugger, Oct. 8th, 1898. 
D. minor. Lesser Spotted Woodpecker. — R.R. A female 
example was picked up on Yarmouth beach some years ago, which 
‘suggests a probable migratory habit. A specimen in the market 
‘recently. The Messrs. Paget record it as *‘ very rare.” Babington 
(B. of 8.) gives it as nesting at Fritton. 
Alcedo ispida. Kingfisher.—F.C. Nests occasionally in the 
| ¥ eighbourhood. Additions in autumn, working southwards. Un- 
, usually numerous in September, 1878, when dozens were shot! 
_ I saw eighteen during one morning’s walk by the Bure. Its pro- 
_ tection should be made imperative. 
i  Coracias garrulus. Roller.—R. Like all other richly attired 
- immigrants, it is shot as soon as it arrives. Several are recorded 
- for this neighbourhood. One killed about 1817; one taken in 
_ rigging of a vessel off Yarmouth, May 25th, 1865 (B. of N.); an 
example obtained at Bradwell, Oct. 9th, 1883; also at Burgh 
Castle, Sept. 29th, 1892. 
__ Merops apiaster. Bee-Eater.—R. One recorded by Shep- 
q - perd and Whitear at Yarmouth (B. of N.). Lubbock, writing in 
1848, says one “ was killed lately at Yarmouth.” 
_ Upupa epops. Hoopoe.—R. “ One or isi say the Messrs. 
Paget, “ generally met with in the autumn.” Three were shot at 
different times in the market-gardens. A worn-out gunner is still 
| living who boasts of locally shooting four of these birds at various 
| times. One on Hasborough lightship. April, 1884 (Nor. N.S8.). 
Mr. Dawson Turner informed the late Mr. J. H. Gurney that 
| Zool, 4th ser. vol. IV.; September, 1400. 2F 


410 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


after a gale fifteen were brought him (B. of S. p. 98). One at 
Horsey, Oct. 9th, 1882. Dead example found on the Vauxhall 
line, April 15th, 1899, having probably struck telegraph-wires. 

Cuculus canorus. Cuckoo.—C. Have known a single indi- 
vidual clear a cabbage-patch of the larve of Pieris brassice in a 
few days. I once reared one from the nest on bullock’s lights. 
It was exceedingly pugnacious, and grew amazingly fast. 

Coccystes glandarius. Great Spotted Cuckoo.—A. A young 
male was shot on Caister denes on Oct. 18th, 1896. Had been 
feeding on the larve of the Buff-tip Moth (vide Nor. N.S. vol. vi. 
p. 509). 

Strix flammea. Barn-Owl.—C. Have observed it arrive 
early in the morning with autumnal immigrants. Still wantonly 
destroyed by many fools entrusted with guns. 


Asio otus. Long-eared Owl.—N.C. ‘‘ Rarely seen” (Paget). | 


Examples occasionally brought up to market dead in winter 
months; two in the market, Dec. 16th, 1899. 

A. accipitrinus. Short-eared Owl.— C. Sometimes arrives 
in considerable numbers in autumn; in other years scarce. 
Occasionally nests. A nest containing five eggs was discovered 
in a field of rushes not far from the sea in the neighbourhood of 
the Broads on May 2nd, 1898 (Zool. 1899, p. 119). I have 
observed this bird hunt in broad daylight. Coming over simul- 
taneously with the Woodcock, is locally named ‘‘ Woodcock-Owl.” 

Syrnium aluco. ‘Tawny Owl.—R. Constant persecution has 
made this species (which the Pagets described as “‘ common” 
rare with us. 

Nyctala tengmalmi. Tengmalm’s Owl.—A. ‘A single speci- 
men is recorded by Messrs. Gurney and Fisher to have been taken 
some years since at Bradwell” (B. of N. vol. 1. p. 60). 

Athene noctua. Little Owl.—A. ‘“ Very rare; two specimens 
are well authenticated” (Paget). A male example brought alive 
into Yarmouth from sea, February, 1862 (Nor. N. S. vol. iv. 
p. 267). A female shot in the grounds of Naval Hospital, April 
21st, 1881. 

[Nyctea scandiaca. Snowy Owl.—A. ‘The late Mr. Stephen 
Miller, of Yarmouth, had a specimen of this noble bird, which, if 
not obtained in this district, was most probably British killed” 
(B. of N. vol. i. p. 58).] 


- = a ’ 
ais 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 411 


Scops gw. Scops-Owl.—A. ‘Norfolk is accredited with six 
occurrences—two at Yarmouth ” (Nor. N.S. vol. iv. p. 267). Mr. 
J. H. Gurney has one caught at Cromer Lighthouse, November, 
1861. I distinctly remember one taken at Lowestoft Lighthouse 
some years ago, but can trace no printed record. One killed at 
Martham, June lst, 1891. 

Circus eruginosus. Marsh-Harrier.—R. The Messrs. Paget 

record it as ‘“‘rather rare.”’ In the earlier part of the century 
was not uncommon on the Broads, where it nested. Now only 
occasionally seen. Last nested in the Broad district in 1878. 
_ C.cyaneus. Hen-Uarrier.—R.R. Becoming rarer year by 
year, thanks to game-preservers and others. ‘‘ Not uncommon” 
(Paget). Occasionally brought to market from the Broad district 
in hard winters. 

C. cineraceus. Montagu’s Harrier.—R.R. Rarely nests on 
the Broads. Mr. J. H. Gurney estimates six nests for 1858, but 
only one for 1898 (Zool. 1899, p. 115). More often met with 
than the two preceding. One caught in a bird-net on North 
Denes, April 28th, 1891. : 

Buteo vulgaris. Common Buzzard.—R.R. Occasionally 
turning up in autumn and winter in some numbers, as in Septem- 
ber, 1881, when several were killed. I saw three washed up dead 
on the beach after a galein the same month. The Messrs. Paget 
refer to it as ‘‘not uncommon.” One taken off Flegg Burgh, 
Nov. 16th, 1897. 

B. lagopus. Rough-legged Buzzard. —N.C. In November 
occasionally arrives in some numbers. ‘Two or three winters 
sometimes elapse without an example being recorded. ‘The 
winter of 1839-40 was a noted year for B. lagopus in Norfolk ; 
again numerous in autumn of 1858, when “ about twenty speci- 
mens were obtained, principally in the neighbourhood of Thetford 
and Yarmouth”; and again in some numbers in September, 1881. 

Haliaétus albicilla. White-tailed Kagle.—A. Marely seen, 
and then always in immature plumage. Messrs. Paget record 
six occurrences: “‘ The late Mr. Girdlestone . . . informed Mr. 
Lubbock that in the sharp winter of 1837 ‘he had seen three of 
these Eagles in sight at once’ on Horsey warren” (B. of N. 
vol. i. p. 4). Several since recorded. One of two shot at 
Winterton in winter of 1856-7 was found to have been feeding 
2F2 


cc i i Mi ii Be 
' 


412 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


on the remains of a Whale stranded on the beach there. One 
taken alive in decoy at Fritton, December, 1878. I observed one 
circling high above head, autumn of 1879. Example shot at 
Belton, Dec. 9th, 1852; one on Breydon, May 2nd, 1892. 

Astur palumbarius. Gos-Hawk.—R. ‘“‘ Very rare—a fine speci- 
men shot in 1833” (Paget). A male taken at Catfield in April, 
1854; a female taken on a fishing-boat off Yarmouth in 1886 
(Connop Catalogue) ; an adult female at Somerleyton, March 
29th, 1893. 

Accipiter nisus. Sparrow-Hawk.—F.C. Receives additions 
in the autumn. An unusual invasion in September, 1881. I 
found several dead on the beach after a gale ; one struck a gas- 
lamp exhausted on the 22nd. The majority were females. 

Milvus ictinus. Kite. —A. Very rare in the Pagets’ time. 
Only occurs as an occasional passing migrant. An example 
killed at Martham, December, 1865. 

Pernis apivorus. Honey-Buzzard.—R. An uncertain autumn 
visitor. Several shot in September, 1881; several records 
previous. One shot at Lound in September, 1882, had the crop 
filled with larve of Wasps (B. of 8.). Babington also records 
one shot at Somerleyton in spring of 1854, in the stomach of 
which remains of Blackbird’s eggs were found. 

Falco peregrinus. Peregrine Falcon.—R. Occasionally shot 
on passage. The two or three I have seen in the flesh were 
males. : 

F’. subbuteo. Hobby.—R.R. ‘‘ Not uncommon in summer ” 
(Paget). Has been once recorded at Yarmouth in February. A 
male example shot at Caister on Oct. 2nd, 1882 (Connop Cata- 
logue). 

F’. vespertinus. Red-footed Falcon. — R. ‘‘ One shot in a 
marsh by Breydon in 1832. . . . Three more were shot in same 
year at Horning”’ (Paget). Animmature male specimen obtained 
at Somerleyton, July 12th, 1862. 

F’. esalon. Merlin. —N.U. A fairly regular and not un- 
common autumnal immigrant. Occasionally dashes into the nets 
of the birdcatchers. A young one caught at sea, Oct. 11th, 1882. 
I have observed it dead on the beach. 

Ff. tmnunculus. Kestrel.—C. Still fairly common, and in 
autumn it is nothing unusual to see three or four at once 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 418 


“hovering” in different directions across ‘the marshlands. Ad- 
ditions in autumn. Local, “ Wind-hoverer.” 

Pandion haliaétus. Osprey.—R.R. “One or two shot nearly 
every year on Breydon or the Broads” (Paget). Was un- 
doubtedly more common in the earlier half of the century, before 
the shoals of Grey Mullet (Mugil capito) forsook Breydon, owing 
to the great silting up of that basin. Two on Filby Broad, 
Sept. 20th, 1898. were observed fishing. 

Phalacrocorax carbo. Cormorant.—N.C. According to Sir 

Thomas Browne this species nested in trees at Reedham, “ from 
| whence Charles the First was wont to be supplied” (Nor. N.S, 
: vol. iv. p. 417). Till within a year ago, “we had (at Herring- 
| 
| 
j 


fleet) always more or less Cormorants with us all the year round, 
but more especially in winter”? (‘Rough Notes on Natural His- 
tory, by H. M. L.), in 1825 there were several nests there. It 

occasionally follows the Herring shoals, and I have observed odd 
birds on Breydon in spring. Six were seen there on May 25th, 
1890, and seventeen on May 19th, 1892. 

P. graculus. Shag.—R.R. ‘ Very rare,” according to 
Messrs. Paget. May be more frequent after the Herring shoals 
_ than is observed. I procured one alive on March 28th, 1898, 
from a fishing-smack, which became an interesting pet. It ate 
 221b. of fish per diem., vomiting the more indigestible bones. 

Another, brought me alive on Nov. 11th, 1899. | 

Sula bassana. Gannet.—C. ‘“ Not uncommon; several were 
shot in the roads after the severe gale of Oct. 31st, 1827” 
(Paget). Is now fairly common out at sea during the fishing 
season. An adult specimen secured on Breydon, Sept. 24th, 
1865. Ihave observed several washed ashore at different times, 
three as recently as Dec. 8th, 1899 ; these were possibly drowned, 
and thrown out of the Herring-nets. 

Ardea cinerea. Common Heron.—C. Does not appear to 
have greatly diminished of late years. ‘The Mautby heronry has 
disappeared since 1874, but a new one exists at Reedham. I[ 
have frequently seen upwards of twenty Herons at a time feeding 
in company on Breydon flats, where they may be watched 
catching Hels and Flounders. Local, “ Hernsher,” 

A. purpurea. Purple Heron.—A. ‘“‘ Has been killed three or 
four times” (Paget), An example, “ Breydon, 1856 or 1857” 


414 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


(Connop Catalogue). Other occurrences :—Ludham, October, 
1865; Yarmouth, October, 1878 (Nor. N. S8.). 

A. ralloides. Squacco Heron.—A. “One caught in a bow- 
net that was hanging out to dry by Ormesby Broad, December, 
1820” (Paget). Dates also given :—Oulton, May, 1831; Ormesby, 
1834. 

Nycticorax griseus. Night-Heron.— A. ‘Mr. Youell has 
known six or seven to have been shot here at different times ” 
(Paget). ‘‘ Three specimens of this Heron were killed on the 
North Denes” (B. of N. vol. 1. p. 175). An example obtained 
on Caister marshes, Nov. 8th, 1860 (tbid.), and another was shot 
at Rollesby Bridge on Nov. 8th, 1899. 

Ardetta minuta. Little Bittern.—R. Messrs. Paget enumerate 
three examples obtained in this neighbourhood. It doubtless 
nested on the Broads early in the century. ‘A Little Bittern 
was shot at Runham, near Yarmouth, on the 10th of October, 
1889” (Nor. N.8.). On July 3rd and 4th, 1893, two males in 
full plumage shot at Rollesby (2bid.) ; one, Oct. 9th, 1896. 

Botaurus stellaris. Common Bittern.—R.R. The drainage 
of the Norfolk swamps has greatly decreased the number of these 
birds of late years. Last Norfolk eggs were discovered March 
30th, 1868. A young bird in August, 1886 (Nor. N.S8.). Two 
or three immigrants occasionally brought to market in winter. 
Local, ‘‘ Bottle-bump.” 

Ciconia alba. White Stork.—A. Messrs. Paget mention a 
pair shot on Burgh marshes in the summer of 1817, and two 
earlier occurrences. An accidental spring and autumn visitor. 
One shot at Oby, May 24th, 1865 (Connop Catalogue). Several 
others have been met with; a tired-out individual was. seen 
resting on a housetop, June 26th, 1892. 

C. ngra. Black Stork. — A. One shot on Breydon, June 
27th, 1877, by John Thomas, punt-gunner. 

Plegadis falcinellus. Glossy Ibis. —A. ‘A pair shot at the 
mouth of the Norwich river, Sept. 13th, 1824; . . . there were 
three or four more in company with them” (Paget). Stevenson 
records two or three others for this neighbourhood, the last being 
killed at Stalham on Sept. 13th, 1868. 

Platalea leucorodia. Spoonbill.—N.U. The Messrs. Paget, 
writing in 1834, after mentioning that a flock of these birds were 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 415 


seen on the marshes in 1774, and several others killed in 1808, 
state that two or three are generally shot every spring on Breydon ; 


the latter statement might apply to the present day, save that, 


happily, they are more frequently allowed to depart in peace. 
_ During the last twelve summers Mr. J. H. Gurney states that 
- ninety-three Spoonbills have visited Breydon (Nor. N. 8. vol. vi. 
_p. 514). Sixteen were seen there on May 13th, 1894: and on 


May Sth, 1895, twelve appeared. On May 10th, 1899, I rowed 
to within a short distance of six which were feeding in a flock on 
the edge of a mud-flat. Twelve on Breydon, June 4th, 1900; 
and subsequently several others. Local, “ Banjo-bill.” 

Anser cinereus. Grey-lag Goose.—R.R. A winter migrant, 
once nesting in the fens. Messrs. Paget refer to it as “very 
common,” which is far from being the case in the present day. 
Stevenson records single examples as follow :—November, 1847, 
at Horsey; April, 1849, on Breydon; September (?), 1854, Yar- 


mouth; March, 1862, on Caister marshes; and in March, 1864, 
at Ludham—two examples; and a third at Horsey same year. 


One was killed by a gunner named Gibbs on Sept. 24th, 1881. 
Babington speaks of several flocks seen on Breydon, Sept. 24th 
and 25th, two birds being shot (B. of 8.). 

A. albifrons. White-fronted Goose.— N.C. An uncertain 
visitor ; I find generally two or three examples brought to market 
every winter, usually immature. 

A. segetum, Bean Goose.—F.C. ‘Less frequently met 
with” [than Grey-lag] (Paget). An uncertain winter visitant; 
in some years none, in others several. Several seen late in 
January, 1892. 

A. brachyrhynchus.. Pink-footed Goose. —N.C. Have ob- 
served it occasionally in the market. In some years none; in 
very severe weather more frequent than any of the preceding. 
Five were shot out of a flock, Feb. 14th, 1879; I also saw two 
immature, Dec. 11th, 1880. Two on Dec. 20th, 1890. 

Bernicla ruficoliis. Red-breasted Goose.—A. “Mr. Wigg,”’ 
says the Messrs. Paget, ‘‘ accidentally bought a specimen of this 
bird in the market, which, to kis constant regret, he plucked and 


cooked.” 
(To be continued.) 


416 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


NOTES FROM POINT CLOATES, N.W. AUSTRALIA. 
By Tuomas Carter. 


Since my last notes appeared in ‘The Zoologist’ (1899, 
p. 139), Mr. A. J. Campbell’s description of the new species of 
Emu Wren (Stipiturus ruficeps), with a beautiful plate of the 
bird, was published in the ‘Ibis,’ July, 1899. There is little 
doubt that Mr. Keartland found the same species on the late 
Wells expedition, but, unfortunately, the skins obtained had to 
be abandoned in the desert, with many others. So far, I have 
only seen this bird on one limited part of a high rugged range 
that abounds with masses of large prickly spinifex and scrub, 
though apparently the whole length of the range (about seventy- 
five miles) offers similar conditions. I saw several of these birds 
there in July last, but failed to secure eggs or any particulars as to 
their breeding habits. It is surprising to see these tiny birds run, 
and occasionally fly, headlong into the dense prickly masses of 
spinifex, and thread their way through the countless spines like 
mice, without being impaled. One showery day, my native and 
self came upon a party of these birds, and succeeded in hunting 
one down and catching it alive, its feathers having become drenched 
with wet. One other new species I may claim for last year, viz. 
Western White Plumed Honey-eater (Ptilotis leilavalensis). I 
forwarded a skin to Mr. Campbell, as for some time I suspected 
it differed from P. pencillata, the eastern type, but had no skin 
to compare. 

A specimen of the same species was forwarded to Mr. A. J. 
North about the same time from North Queensland, and the 
bird was named (differently) by both gentlemen. It is one of the 
commonest and most noticeable birds on all the rivers and white 
gum creeks where water lodges, from the Gascoyne River to 
here, and doubtless its range extends across the tropics. In fact 
it is so abundant that for some years I never even closely 
examined a specimen, never imagining it was likely to be a new 


NOTES FROM POINT CLOATHS, N.W. AUSTRALIA. 417 


‘species, which shows how carefully one should work in new 
country. It is of very sprightly, inquisitive habits, constantly 
uttering its pleasant liquid warbling note from earliest dawn 
until dark. It has a harsh alarm-note, and is quick to sound it 
on the approach of a dog, hawk, or biped, and all within hearing 
will hurry up to help the first bird to scold. 
_ The second week in July I paid a visit to the nearest gum 
creek that contains good pools of water, in search of nests (the 
eggs being then undescribed), and was fortunate in finding five— 
three with a clutch each of two eggs, one with two newly hatched 
young, and one ready for laying. The nests were of light 
construction, of fibrous roots and grass, mixed and lined with 
vegetable down and sheeps’ wool, and suspended about three feet 
from the ground, either in the dense prickly acacia bushes, or sort 
of large salt bush that growsround water holes there. In the rushes 
surrounding these pools were nests containing eggs of the Black- 
tailed Tribonyx (Microtribonyx ventralis). 
About February 14th, last year, some flocks of White-fronted 
Chats (Ephthianura albifrons) arrived here, but only stayed a 
few days. It is the first time they have come under my notice. 
Keartland’s Honey-eater (Ptilotis keartlandt) was fairly common 
on the high country behind the range, but I found no nests. I 
-may mention that a skin of this bird was sent by me from here to 
Melbourne in 1890 for identification; but it was not until 1895 
that Mr. Keartland secured specimens, when it was recognized 
by Mr. North as a new species. 
On July 28th one of my men went to Frazer Island in the boat, 
and returned with more than two hundred eggs, all fresh, of the 
Pied Cormorant (Phalacrocorax varius). They were a welcome 
addition to our meals for some days. The nests are built in 
thick, spreading bushes, with large, soft, greenish grey leaves, that 
_ grow only on the edge of the sea. 

In August, White-eyed Crows (Corvus australis), Kestrels (T'in- 
nunculus cenchroides), Brown and Rufous Larks (Cinclorhamphus 
cruralis and rufescens), Tri-coloured Chats (Hphthianura tricolor), 
Brown Hawks (Hieracidea occidentalis), Pipits (Anthus australis), 
Singing Honey-eaters (Ptilotis sonora), and Grass Parrakeets 
(Melopsitiacus undulatus) were breeding numerously. I visited 
a new nest of Spotted Harrier (Circus assimilis), but it contained 


418 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


no eggs; and found a nest of White-shouldered Caterpillar-eater 

(Lalage tricolor), with young, high up in a white gum sapling. 
Yellow White Eyes (Zosterops lutea) were common, and I 

shot specimens occasionally through the winter up to August 6th, 


to see if they were breeding, but came upon no indications until | 


February 13th, this year, when I shot a male in some mangroves 
near the N.W. Cape, with testicles much enlarged. When we 
were shearing in September, a tame cat brought in a black- 
fronted Dottrel (4igialitis melanops), which was breeding, doubt- 
less, on the adjoining salt-marsh. 

On October 19th a pair, male and female, of the scarce Red- 
kneed Dottrel (Hrythrogonys cinctus) fell to one discharge of my 
gun, at an inland creek. They had one or two others with them, 
doubtless young of the year. The Sandpipers referred to in my 


last paper (Zool. 1899, p. 142) were kindly identified for me by 


Mr. Campbell as the Grey-rumped Sandpiper (Heteractitis 
brevipes). They were. common all the summer, especially in 
November ; on the 2nd I killed eight with one shot, in company 
with other waders. 

During the prevalence of heavy southerly gales in December, 
Silver Gulls (Larus nove hollandie) forsook the beach, and were 
feeding on beetles on the high open country some miles from sea. 
On December 20th, after some parching east winds, an Oriental 
Pratincole (Glareola orientalis) settled on the beach near the 
house. So far, this is the south and west record. | 

In January, 1900, a Yellow-billed Albatross (Thalassogeron 
chlororhynchus), and, a little earlier, a Giant Petrel (Ossifraga 
gigantea), were picked up dead on the beach—a long way north 
for these birds. 

In February last I took a trip towards the N.W. Cape. On 
the way a very heavy N.E. blow set in, with every indication of a 
hurricane, but the latter did not arrive. ‘There were numbers of 
Lesser Frigate Birds (Fregata minor) blown down. A party 
of eight flew a few feet over my head, making their way north 
again; unluckily, I had just strapped my gun to buggy ready 
to move on. There were numbers at sea, and that night by 
moonlight I saw several flying north, and also the next day. They 
only occur here when hurricanes are about. Black-cheeked Falcons 
(Falco melanogenys), too, made their appearance in some numbers, 


4 
wi 


NOTES FROM POINT CLOATES, N.W. AUSTRALIA. 419 


and flocks of Oriental Pratincoles. The latter soon left us. In 
a large mangrove swamp near the Cape, Pelicans, Egrets, Ducks, 
Mangrove Bitterns, and Waders were in numbers. I secured 
specimens of Red-capped Dotterel (Avgialitis ruficapilla) and 
Sharp-tailed Stints (Heteropygia acuminata), which I have never 
seen on the beach here. Sacred Kingfishers (Halcyon sanctus) 
were common on the coast in February ; they visit us yearly about 
then: are they migratory? On February 20th natives brought in 
a Hoary-headed Grebe (Podiceps nestor), which they had caught 
on the beach. It was very poor, and a sign of bad drought inland. 
Fortunately this drought broke in March, and between March 10th 
and date of writing—April 2lst—we have had fifteen inches of 
rain. The inland clay, flat country is flooded and impassable for 
miles. 

Ata large gum flat twenty-five miles east of here, which is now 
full of water, I last month shot, with other birds, the following 
‘interesting species:—White-headed Sea Eagle (Haliastur gir- 
: renera), Little Hagle (Nisetus morphnoides), Owlet Nightjar 
| (Aegotheles nove-hollandie), Black-eared Cuckoo (Misocalius 
_osculans), Red-browed Pardalote (Pardalotus rubricatus), Varie- 
; gated Wren (Malurus lamberti), Red-rumped Tit (Acanthiza 
| pyrrhopygia), Little Black Cormorant (Phalacrocorax  sticto- 
cephalus), Plumed Whistling Duck (Dendrocycna eytoni), Black- 

capped Tree-runner (Sitiella pileata), Marsh Tern (Hydrochelidon 
hybrida), Oriental Pratincole (Glareola orientalis). The two 
latter species were in large flocks at my first visit, and I hoped 
would breed there, but when revisited a few days ago saw only 
one Marsh Tern. The Pratincoles were balls of fat. Some 
Straw-necked Ibis (Geronticus spinicollis) and White-necked 
Herons (Ardea pacifica) were there, and some Black Swans. 
Nests of Teal (Nettion castanewm) were plentiful in the hollow gum- 
trees, with eight or nine eggs. A MRed-rumped Kingfisher 
(Halcyon pyrrhopygius) I shot had several large scorpions in its 
gizzard. 
Last month I was at the Minilya River, and secured specimens 
of the Red-breasted Babbler (Pomatorhinus rubeculus), and saw a 
colony of their nests (old) in a large white gum close to the 
station-house. On July 26th, last year, I found an Osprey’s 
nest with the unusual number of four eggs, all beautifully marked. 


420 THE ZOOLOGIST. ; 

The nest was placed on a boulder about three feet high, in the 
bed of a strong creek where it emptied into the sea. Later in | 
the season I saw a nest in a still more exposed position, viz. on 
the bare surface of a large open salt-marsh near the end of a 
salt-pool. The rugged range, before mentioned, was within half | 
a mile of both these nests, and high scrubby sandhills stil] closer, 
so it is strange the birds should choose such absurdly accessible 
places. Doubtless, the reason is, that months or a year may pass 
without a human being visiting there. 

This being a season of rain that may not occur again in a 
generation, birds should be plentiful; and I hope in the course 
of the year to have opportunities of making other interesting 
notes. No more Rabbits have been seen here. 


( 421 ) 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


MAMMALIA. 


Lesser Shrew in Cambridgeshire.—In September, 1899, I obtained 
two batches of pellets of the Barn-Owl from nesting places in hollow trees 
at Wisbech St. Mary. They yielded respectively one and four skulls of 
the Lesser Shrew (Sorex minutus), in addition to remains of the Common 
Shrew, Water Shrew, Bank, Field, and Water Voles, Long-tailed Field- 
Mouse, Common Mouse, Brown Rat, and House-Sparrow. The Lesser 
Shrew, although probably not uncommon, does not appear to have been 
often noticed in the fens. Jenyns, quoted by Miller and Skertchly in 
*The Fenland Past and Present,’ says, “I have taken it in a single 
instance in Horningsea Fen, but not elsewhere.” — CHARLES OLDHAM 


Alderley Edge). 


Lesser Shrew and Bank Vole in Berks.—In answer to Mr. W. H. 
Warner’s enquiry (ante, p. 381), I am pleased to be able to inform him that 
‘the Lesser Shrew (Sorex minutus) is certainly found in this part of Berk- 
shire ; I have taken it, but not recently. I much regret I have no skin 
‘by me at present. I am not certain about Microtus glareolus. The num- 
‘ber of Mus sylvaticus that infests my garden is quite extraordinary ; on one 
small herbaceous border I caught over seven hundred last year. It is 
almost impossible to grow yellow crocuses, though they are not nearly so 
hard on the bulbs of other coloured varieties, and never touch narcissus 
ea Nosxz (Temple Combe, Henley-on-Thames). 


Insectivorous Habits of the Long-tailed Field-Mouse.—During the 
inter months Long-tailed Field-Mice (Mus sylvaticus) resort in numbers 
4 the narrow horizontal tunnels in the sandstone rock connected with the 
‘disused copper mines on Alderley Edge. In November, 1898, when I 
first noticed the Mouse-holes among the heaps of loose stones, and the im- 
pressions of multitudes of little feet in the dry sand of the tunnel-floors, I 
was at a loss to think what had induced the Mice to adopt the life of troglo- 
dytes. A feeble light penetrates some of the main tunnels, but in the 
side workings it is pitch-dark at all times of the day, and here footprints 
‘were numerous in places more than a hundred and fifty yards from the 
outer air. The piles of gnawed hips and blackberry-seeds in birds’ nests in 


422 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


the woods outside showed that food was plentiful enough there, but in the 

tunnels there were not even fungi on which the Mice could feed, and the 

drippings from the candles of casual trippers did not seem sufficient to 

account for their presence. Besides two moths, Gonoptera libatria and 

Scotosia dubitata, which are fairly abundant, a gnat (Culex), two flies 
(Blepharoptera serrata and Borborus niger), and possibly other insects, 

hybernate in countless numbers on the roofs and walls of the tunnels. 

That the Mice frequent the place in order to feed upon the insects was 

clear from an examination of the stomachs of several which I trapped. — 
Wings and empty skins of the gnat and flies, as well as legs of the moths, 
were easily identified in their half-digested contents. In some cases vege- 
table matter was present in addition, and, as the footprints were present 
from end to end of the tunnels, it appears that the Mice obtain part of their 
food in the woods; whilst the burrows in the tunnels themselves seem to 
indicate that they actually live in their recesses for the time being, and do 
not merely visit them to prey upon the insects they find there. Even in 
June there are flies in thousands on the walls of the tunnels, but during 
the summer months I have failed to trap any Mice, nor are there then any 
fresh tracks to be seen in the sand.—CHARLES OLDHAM (Alderley Edge). 


AVES. 


Mistle-Thrush laying twice in the same Nest. — Last season I 
obtained a clutch of four eggs belonging to T'urdus viscivorus from a nest 
near Bath. On visiting it again a short time afterwards—I think at about 
a week’s interval—I found the bird had laid in the same nest a second 
time, laying two or three eggs. I was unaware that the Mistle-Thrush 
would return to its robbed nest, and should be interested to hear if others 
have met with similar instances. It is quite possible another pair of 
Mistle-Thrushes may have appropriated the vacant nest.—Cuar.es B. 
Horssrueu (Marlock, Somerset). 


The Bearded Titmouse : a Correction.—In the article on the Bearded 
Titmouse (Panurus biarmicus), ante, p. 359, Mr. Gurney says “ John Ray 
published the first notice aud description of this family of birds in 1674 (a 
scarce book.)” May I point out that in a much earlier work (now before 
me in my library), by Conrad Gesner “ De Avibus,” 1575, there are illustra- 
tions given of all the known Tits, with full descriptions. Seven are por- 
trayed. The woodcuts are very quaint, and the volume is in folio, and in 
Latin. I expect Ray knew this book well, for he wrote and published his 
work just one hundred years later than Gesner.—H. L. J. Ripspate (The 
Dene, Rottingdean, near Brighton). 


The Bearded Tit and other Birds in Norfolk.—I have just read Mr. 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 423 


Gurney’s most interesting paper on the Bearded Tit (Panurus biarmicus), 
ante, p. 358. I do not know how Mr. Bird arrived at the conclusion that 
there were only thirty-three nests in Norfolk in 1898, and I hope he has 
nderstated the number, or that they have increased since then. I know 
one small broad which has been most strictly preserved for some years, and 
where even the entomologist is not allowed, though it is sometimes difficult 
to keep him out! Here the Bearded Tits have increased in a most satis- 
factory manner. A pair or two might always have been seen. On May 
7th, 1899, I found a nest with seven young just ready to fly, and there were 
at least two pairs with young. On May 3rd this year I saw one nest from 
which the young had just flown, and I watched both parent birds for some 
time. It was blowing very hard, and as I crouched in the reeds the male 
bird settled within a few feet; a beautiful sight it was to see him preening 
his feathers in the sunlight. On another part of the same broad I saw at 
least three pairs feeding young, or carrying excrement from the nests ; 
further still I saw other birds feeding in the rushes, and I thought at the 
‘time there were at least six pairs on this broad. Quite ten pairs of the Great 
Crested Grebe (Podicipes cristatus) might have been counted. Over thirty 
male Wild Ducks rose as we rounded a sharp corner; several pairs of Shoveler 
(Spatula clypeata) were nesting, and I had the pleasure of seeing a Marsh- 
Harrier (Circus eruginosus). The keeper assured me he had never seen one 
_of these birds here before. Montagu’s Harriers try to rear their young here 
every year, but the nest is cut out, or the old birds are shot, though this 
_ Season I have hopes that they got off. A pair of Kestrels were nesting in 
an old windmill. ‘They'll ’ave to die,” said the keeper. It was no use 
"my telling him that they did far more good than harm, and the fact that he 
’ caught two or three of these birds with Mice in their claws at the same spot 
last season in nowise impressed him ; so I took the eggs, in the hope that 
the old birds might find more hospitable quarcers elsewhere. I placed the 
four eggs in an incubator, and one was hatched in twenty-nine days. I never 
allow Kestrels to be killed at home, unless caught red-handed at the Phea- 
sant-coops; and it is a curious fact that whereas each year we are obliged 
to destroy more than one of these birds, a pair of Sparrow-Hawks are con- 
tinually flying over the rearing-field ; neither my keepers nor myself have 
ever known them touch a Pheasant, though they often take young Sparrows 
and other small birds that are attracted by the Pheasant food. We never 
“molest them, and I doubt not most keepers would think us quite mad. 
Whilst in Norfolk I noticed several of those indiscriminate instruments of 
torture, “‘ pole-traps ”; they were not set, and, on asking the reason, I was 
informed that they had caught five Snipe in them the week previous to my 
visit—Hratrtey Nose (Temple Combe, Henley-on-Thames). 


Nesting of the Great Tit (Parus major).—April 29th. Nesting-box 


J 


se pe a 


424 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


containing nest of Great Tit and five eggs. May 2nd, 8 a.m. Eight eggs | 
old bird absent, and not looked at again to-day. May 3rd, 7 p.m. Found 
old one sitting without addition to clutch. May 13th, 1 p.m. Eight eggs” 
still in nest. May 14th, 6 p.m. Six young hatched; two eggs remain. 
May 30th. Between 6 a.m. and 7 a.m. the old birds visit the nest with food, 
sixty-four times within the hour; when leaving nest they invariably left for 
further supplies in an opposite direction. Feeding at this rate is not 
carried on throughout the day; they may sometimes be absent for a con- 
siderabletime. Feeding commences about 4 a.m., and finishes about 7 p.m. 
June 2nd. The brood complete of eight young left their nest. In all 
probability the old one would commence incubation on May 2nd, with a 
result of twelve days, and an addition of, say, nineteen days for the young 
to remain within the nest.—J. StEELE-Ex.iort (Clent, Worcestershire). 


Nesting of the Common Sparrow (Passer domesticus). — Yarrell 
mentions the first batch of eggs laid usually consists of five to six ; Morris 
practically quotes the same words; Macgillivray gives the laying four to six ; 
Saunders states five to six; Seebohm goes one better, and says five to 
- seven. My personal experience is that a clutch of six is most unusual, and ~ 
does not happen in even one per cent. of nests containing the full laying. 
Nests with a clutch of four are about as numerous as those with five, and a 
remarkable quantity have a full complement of only three, at a rough esti- 
mate, say, fifteen percent. There are many other remarks with which, 
after considerable experience, one does not care to agree, as, for instance, — 
Seebohm adds it is probable that with those birds that build domed nests 
in branches of trees the habit is hereditary. Healso adds that the Sparrow 
often sits upon the first egg as soon as laid; my experience being that, if 
the nest is placed in a hole, then the female will roost at the side of the 
nest, but in no way adding to their incubation until (taking, for instance, 
the laying of a clutch of five) the evening following the laying of the fourth 
egg, when incubation starts. Yarrell evidently infers that the early layings 
of the Sparrow contain the largest clutches of eggs. This is by no means 
invariably the rule; most frequently the same number is laid both in the 
second and third layings, and occasionally, as in this year, two nests con- 
taining six followed the robbery of the first laying, when previously nothing 
more than five could be found. Yarrell points out that the Sparrow may 
occasionally be seen in winter carrying materials to the holes they inhabit; 
this is evidently only for sleeping accommodation. The actual nesting 
commences as early as the first week in March, the complete lining of 
feathers not being added for many weeks hence, and then not until several 
eggs have been laid. Laying usually commences with great regularity in 
the Midlands during the second week in May. ‘Three broods are usually 
reared if no molestation takes place; if the first two layings are robbed, 


P= ee ae ee a |S eee 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 425 


_ even then two broods will be reared. When a nest and eggs are destroyed, 


it takes but ten days before another nest is built, and five more eggs are 


q deposited. The number of young reared would not average much beyond 
three to a brood.—J. SrrEeLE-Exurorrt (Clent, Worcestershire). 


Nesting of the Starling (Sturnus vulgaris). — March 29th. Starling 
clearing out some of the old materials from last year’s nesting-site. April 
28th. Two eggsin nest. April 30th, 6.806 p.m. Four eggs; old bird within 
the nest, and eggs seemed slightly warm, but possibly she had not actually 


_ started incubation, as many birds nesting in holes roost on the side of the 


nest at night. May Ist. Sitting on five eggs. May [1th, 6.30 p.m. Five 
eggs still in nest. May 12th, 7.30 p.m. Four young hatched; other egg 
infertile. May 25th. Feeding young seems to average about fifteen times 
to the hour, and this I think almost regularly throughout the day of some 
fourteen hours’ duration; at least, whenever I was watching, the old birds 
never seemed to cease their labours. Being able to conceal myself close to 
the nest, I gained the full advantage of watching the young being fed within 
a foot of me. The food (which at this period seemed to consist almost 
entirely of a large white larva, but, owing to the rapidity with which the 
food was given, it was impossible to identify it), when brought to the nest, 
was given to whichever young one clamoured most, and held a foremost 
position at the entrance to nest, the one frequently taking several feeds in 
succession, until pushed aside by another which by now had become still 
more eager in its hunger. Almost invariably after the food had been taken 
the old bird would wait a moment to allow of that particular young one 
turning round and voiding any excrement; if this failed, then a rapid 
search of the nest, and other excrement, if any, removed; in the brief 
meantime the old bird probably having undergone a severe course of pecking 
from the insatiable and impatient young. June Ist. All the young left 
nest. June 11th. The old ones again back at nest, but no further indica- 
tion of a second brood took place. Reckoning from May Ist, the incubation 
lasted eleven days; but if such commenced on the evening of April 30th, 


_ and the last was the infertile egg, then incubation in this instance covered 


Peo 


twelve days, and the young remained in the nest twenty days. 

Particulars of another pair slightly vary :—May 6th, 7 p.m. Three eggs ; 
old bird flew from nest. May 7th, 8 a.m. Three eggs in nest and cold ; 
7 p.m., four eggs and bird within nest. May 12th. Probably owing to my 
too frequent visits, the eggs had previously been forsaken, and this day I 
find the birds have removed them from the nest. May 12th. A Starling’s 
egg placed by myself within the nest was also removed. May 18th, 7 p.m. 
Another three eggs in nest. May 19th, 10 a.m. Four eggs; bird flew out 
of nest, the eggs being warm. May 30th, 7.30 p.m. Four eggs remain in 
nest. May 3lst,8 a.m. One young and three eggs; 7 p.m., three young 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., September, 1900. 2G 


426 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


and one egg; this constant interference causing them to again forsake. In 
this instance incubation had lasted at least twelve days.—J. STEELE- 
Extort (Clent, Worcestershire). 


Cuckoo in the Shetlands.— On Aug. 8th I caught a young fully-fledged 
Cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) on the lawn in front of this house, where it was 
feeding. The bird was very tame (perhaps it knew that the Wild Birds 
Protection Act is in force in Shetland until the end of this month!) I 
have seen and heard the Cuckoo in and about the shrubbery many times 
during the past two months.—T. Epmonpston Saxsy (Halligarth, Unst, 
Shetland). 


Common Buzzard (Buteo vulgaris) shot in Hertfordshire.—I regret 
that I have previously omitted to record the shooting of a Common Buzzard 
in Hertfordshire on Jan. 27th last. It was a male bird, ana measured three 
feet from tip to tip, wing measurement, and turned the scale at two ounces 
short of two pounds. Mr. Spary, the local taxidermist, remarked to me 
that the bird was as fat as butter, and had probably been feasting in some 
rich game-preserves. He told me also that all the Hawks and Owls he had 
had through his hands were never very fat, and that the case of the Buzzard 
under notice was a singular exception. 1 have promised not to divulge the 


exact locality where the bird was shot, as the keeper is afraid of ‘‘ marching: 


orders” should it reach the ears of his employer.—W. PErcivaL WESTELL 
(5, Glenferrie Road, St. Albans, Herts). 


Nesting Habits of the Sparrow-Hawk.— In treating of an issue in 
this connection (ante, p. 381), Mr. A. H. Meiklejohn has awakened in me a 
responsive chord. No bird have I followed and studied more industriously 
in the breeding season than Accipiter nisus. Perhaps, then, as I aspire to 
the credit of knowing something about the species in question, a corner may 
be found for this communication, though I would wish, quite modestly, to 
say at the outset that Mr. Meiklejohn is mistaken in fancying that attention 
has never yet been called in print to the partiéular traits in the Sparrow- 
Hawk's economy so recently adverted to by him. Some four years ago a 
monthly publication, ‘ The Ornithologist’ by name, entered on a somewhat 
precarious and certainly brief existence, and in its pages a very animated 
discussion was maintained for upwards of six months concerning the 
nesting economy of the Sparrow-Hawk. I should like to be allowed to 
reproduce in these columns the gist of what I wrote in the May number of 
that magazine for 1896, as I have had no reason subsequently to alter or 
even modify the views then expressed. They were the outcome of many 
years’ assiduous and unrelenting study of Sparrow-Hawks in their woodland 
haunts during the breeding season, and should go to prove that the habit to 
which Mr. Meiklejohn specifically refers has not always hitherto been 


ae 


‘NOTES AND QUERIES. 427 


‘shrouded in obscurity. I have found and critically examined many scores 
of Sparrow-Hawks’ nests, and have taken hundreds of their eggs, and in 
the whole of my experience I cannot recall to mind a single case in which 
the parent birds had not resorted to the old and discarded nests of some 
other species. These same nests, erstwhile the possessions of Ring- Doves, 
_Carrion-Crows, and Magpies, generally presented a very ragged appearance 
. previously to adaptation, being tattered and torn by the storms and gales of 
winter. ‘ Long ere the leaf is out—sometimes, indeed, as early as the end 
of March—mental selection is unquestionably made of the nest that is 
eventually to be used as a breeding-site.” At dawn, and again at the 
approach of dusk, the birds are frequently to be found in its vicinity, either 
soaring high in the air, and occasionally uttering sharp screams as they 
wheel to and fro, or else perched in the trees beneath. ‘With the advance 
_ of spring they will be found busy at the nest itself, apparently cleaning and 
_ patching it up, while in course of time there is superimposed a shallow and 
_ very extended structure of twigs and sticks, in which receptacle the eggs 
are laid.” The substructure or basis is entirely the handiwork of some 
other species, the superstructure that of the Sparrow-Hawks themselves. 
The birds gather the supplementary materials chiefly from beneath the 
_ tree, flying up and down in turn, as I have repeatedly proved by watching 
| them from an ambush. The eggs are laid on alternate days, six being the 
; largest clutch I have taken, though I have secured as many as fifteen and 
_ sixteen from single nests, the first egg of the latter number having been 
_ laid on May Ist, and the last on May 31st; so that, by judicious manipu- 
lation of the nest and its contents, I had induced the bird into laying an 
_ egg on every other day throughout that traditionally merry month. It will 

generally be found that one egg in a clutch differs appreciably in the mark- 
: ings from the remainder ; sometimes it is altogether devoid of colouring 
matter, while at others a considerable portion of its bluish-white ground is 
blushed over with brown of a much paler shade than that with which the 
rest of the eggs in the clutch are usually so handsomely clouded and 
blotched. Sparrow-Hawks begin to sit about May 10th, in Leicestershire, 

or about six weeks after the first overtures have been made to the nest that 

has been selected. So far as I have been enabled to test the point, the 
_ eges—which are exceedingly thick-shelled—are seldom hatched before the 
expiration of five weeks. The ultra-extended platform built by the 
Sparrow-Hawks themselves, and superadded to the relics of the nest of 
some other species, is assuredly a beautiful expression of the instinct when 
considered in relation to its use at a subsequent stage. Nevertheless, the 
fact that this roomy plateau not only does duty as a repository for freshly- 
killed prey, but as a family banqueting-table, whither the young periodically 
return for many days after they are fledged and gone out into the world, 

2Ga2 


428 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


appears to be teo obvious a feature in the economy of the species to he even 
incidentally noted by any of the so-called popular writers on the birds of — 
these islands ! 

Before concluding, I must explain one little matter. I have spoken of 
the hundreds of Sparrow-Hawks’ eggs that I have taken, but it must be 
remembered that the species is notoriously baneful to shooting interests, 
and that gamekeepers wage a war of extermination against it at all seasons. 
On many and many an occasion my plundering of a nest has sufficed to 
save the bird’s life ; whereas, had I not been present to plead for mercy and 
climb to the nest, the brooding bird would have been ruthlessly shot on the 
spot, and the beautiful eggs left to their fate. Such interposition profited 
the owners of the various nests equally with myself, seeing that they were 
allowed to escape with their lives, and subsequently laid eggs elsewhere for 
my appropriation. It may appear strange, but it is none the less absolutely 
true, that the old female Sparrow-Hawk, from whose nest I abstracted the 
fifteen eggs, got to know me, through my repeated visits to her home in a 
Scotch-fir, so well that at the last she never troubled to leave the nest until 
my head was on a level with it. It was only on the occasion of my final 
‘“‘call” that she evinced real indignation, however, and for a moment the 
situation was not pleasant when she faced round and unfolded her wings at 
the distance of a few inches only. What a wicked eye she turned on me, 
too, but that was the full extent of her hostility. —H. 8. Davenport 
(Melton Mowbray). 


Quail in Cheshire. — Several times during the latter half of July 
I heard the liquid trisyllabic note of the Quail (Coturnia communis) near 
Wilmslow. On one evening four or five birds were calling on Lindow Moss, 
and in the surrounding fields. —Cuas. OLpHAm (Alderley Edge). 


Quail in Hertfordshire.—A Quail (Coturnix communis) was picked up 
dead outside the post-office here in May, 1899, by one of the city police, it 
evidently having come in contact with the telegraph-wires. — W. Percivan 
WESTELL (5, Glenferrie Road, St. Albans, Herts). 


Black-tailed Godwit (Limosa belgica) in Hants.—On Aug. 20th, 
whilst out in my punt in the harbour, I shot three Black-tailed Godwits ; 
they were feeding on some very soft and rotten mud. One bird which I 
weighed scaled 83 0z.—JoHn Srarzs (Portchester). 


Rough Notes on Derbyshire Ornithology, 1899-1900.—Although 
the winter of 1898-1899 was so mild, large flocks of Bramblings were 
reported from different parts of the county. A single shot fired out of 
curiosity into a large flock not far from Derby, on Jan. 26th, 1898, brought 
down no fewer than fourteen. On Jan. 27th I saw a nicely set-up Slavonian 
Grebe at Hutchinson’s shop, which had been killed at Allestree towards the 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 429 


md of the previous November. A Little Auk was also received at the 
same time, taken in an emaciated state on the moors outside Sheffield, and 
now in the Sheffield Museum. Mr. Storrs Fox obtained a Rook (about the 
eginning of February) “ whose upper mandible was very much elongated, 
being about 1} to 12 in. longer than the lower one. This additional part 
‘was narrow and curved downwards after the manner of a Chough’s beak, 
The bird was put into an aviary, but was killed by a Rat the same night.” 
The bones of the skull proved to be normal in size and shape, the long tip 
being composed of horny covering alone. ‘The Chiffchaff was singing in the 
Ashburne district by March 30th, and Sand-Martins were noticed on April 
6th. Owing to the mild weather Lapwings began to lay earlier than usual, 
and eggs were found before the end of March. Long-tailed Tits were 
exceedingly numerous in the spring of 1899, and more nests were found 
than in any year I can remember. The Grasshopper-Warbler was absent 
from its usual breeding haunts ; generally six or seven pairs are to be found 
within a radius of three or four miles, but in 1899 and 1900 none of the 
old breeding places were tenanted. A Carrion-Crow’s nest, found on April 
15th, contained a single egg. The tree showed no signs of having been 
previously climbed, and on the 20th asingle young Crow occupied the nest. 
As the clutch of the previous year had only consisted of two eggs, perhaps 
they were the produce of an almost barren pair. Mr. H. G. Tomlinson 
noticed a Swift at Burton on May 4th, and on the following day Mr. Storrs 
Fox saw one at Ashford lake. ‘The Swift is perhaps the most regular in 
its visits of any of the migrants, and often returns literally to the day. 
Under date of April 17th, Mr. Storrs Fox writes that one of the keepers 
in his neighbourhood saw a Great Grey Shrike “about a fortnight ago.” 
He had a shot at it, but it flew away. On May 10th a Dotterel was picked 
4 up under the telegraph-wires on the Nottingham road just outside the town 
_ of Derby (cf. ‘ Field,’ May 20th, 1899). It was an adult in spring plumage, 
and, with the exception of those mentioned in ‘ The Zoologist’ for 1894, is 
; the only specimen recorded from the county during the last twenty years. 
Waterhens’ nests are often built some distance from the ground, but on 
May 11th I came across one quite sixteen feet up a large chestnut on the 
shore of Calwich Abbey Pond. Another nest at Yeldersley contained 
thirteen eggs, but, though they were of much the same type, of course they 
"may have been the produce of more than one bird. In addition to the 
breeding places of the Tufted Duck mentioned in ‘ The Zoologist,’ 1899, 
p. 476, they have also established themselves at Bradley, a couple of miles 
to the east, and with a few years’ protection would probably become nume- 
rous in the district. As it is, most of the young birds of the year are shot, 
and the increase is hardly perceptible. A Willow-Wren’s nest at Shirley 
Vicarage was built in a small dead spruce, three feet from the ground, 


430 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


This is the only nest out of some seventy which I have seen which was quite 
clear of the ground, though I remember one built among ivy at the bottom 
of a wall which did not rest on but was just above a path. On the other 
hand, it is not uncommon to see Chiffchafts’ nests from three to seven feet 
from the ground, and I have seen one ten feet high in the trellis on the side 
of a house. A male Jackdaw paired with a female Magpie at Bentley, and 
actually built a nest, but soon afterwards deserted it, perhaps on account of 
being disturbed. They were repeatedly seen together, and the Jackdaw 
has been observed to feed the Magpie. The Jackdaw is an escaped bird, 
and had been noticed associating with Magpies during the previous winter. 
The nest, which was built by the Magpie, was of the usual type, but had 
no roof, and when deserted had no clay lining. During the winter of 
1899-1900 many Bitterns were shot in different parts of the country. 
Through Mr. G. Pullen, I heard of one which was shot at Morley in 
November, 1899; and Mr. Hutchinson has recorded two others in the 
‘Field’ as having been “ lately ” (Jan. 30th) shot at Egginton and Smalley. 
In November, 1899, a watcher named Hudson picked up a dead bird in the 
grounds of Wootton Lodge, Staffordshire, which, from his description, ap- 
peared to be a Fork-tailed Petrel. It was apparently starved to death. 
Mr. J. Masefield, of Cheadle, has kindly traced this specimen, which 
luckily was preserved, and has ascertained that the supposition was correct. 
It is now in the posgession of Mr. Mears, of Longton. 

1900.—The very severe weather in February proved destructive to the 
birds. Many dead Chaffinches, Blackbirds, and Starlings were to be found 
by the roadsides as the snow melted. It was a curious sight to see the 
Tree-Creeper diligently searching the churchyard-wall in the very middle 
of the village, and so engrossed in its task that it allowed one to stand 
within a yard or two of it. An enormous flock of Wood-Pigeons, consisting 
of many hundreds of birds, frequented the Ramsor Woods till late in 
March. A curious incident which took place on March 18th seems to 
show that there is more affection between birds than is commonly supposed, 
A cock Blackbird was found lying dead outside a window at 10.15 a.m. 
Probably it was killed by flying against the window, as blood was oozing 
from its bill, its feathers were unruffled, and wings outspread. The hen 
stood by the dead body, and actually allowed itself to be touched with a stick 
by my brother-in-law, only uttering a mournful note. He then picked it 
up, but replaced it on the ground by its mate, Twenty minutes later he 
found it still by the dead bird, but, on gently touching it with his foot, it 
flew easily away, and skulked among the bushes. Two hours later the dead 
bird had disappeared (possibly picked up by a Dog). Many species of birds 
seem to have sufiered from the severe weather of February. The Long- 
tailed Tits, which were so common the previous year, were almost extermi- 


ee ee aa ee eee 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 431 


nated, and the same may be said of the Golden-crested Wrens. Curiously 
_ enough, the number of eggs laid by our common birds seemed to be fewer 
than usual. Very few Thrushes’ or Blackbirds’ nests contained more than 
_ four eggs, and often only three were found; while I have found nests with 
only two young birds. On April 18th a Brown Owl was found nesting in 
the fork of a tall spruce in Dovedale. The nest was quite open, and the 
~ Owl could be seen from the hillside above. Nearly all the nests in this 
district are in holes of trees, but I have seen a Brown Owl’s nest on the 


ground under the shelter of a small rock in a wood in North Wales. While 
returning from a visit to a Sparrow-Hawk’s nest on May 12th, I heard a 


clear, ringing, quickly-repeated note, quite unlike that of any of our common 


birds. Directly afterwards the chatter of a Mistle-Thrush and the Lap- 
wing’s cry called my attention to three birds flying rapidly up the valley 
close together, with regular swift beats of the wing. As they passed me I 
had a good look at them, and noticed their pale faded brown colour and 
somewhat Gull-like-shaped wings. They flew straight and fast, and were 
soon out of sight. At the time I thought they were Sand-Grouse ; in fact, 
I know of no other bird that could be mistaken for them. Black Grouse 
still breed in small numbers in this neighbourhood. A nest with six eggs 
was found on May 16th on the Staffordshire side. On May 17th I visited 
the site of the Raven’s nest in Howdenchest, which is mentioned by 
Seebohm (‘ British Birds,’ vol. i. p. 49). Although it is nearly forty years 
since the nest was last used by the Ravens, the remains of the nest are 
clearly visible. One of the keepers told me that he saw a Raven on his 
beat about April 5th. It was circling round a lambing ewe, and flew right 
away out of sight. He had also noticed Short-eared Owls above Mulbrook 
in the autumn of 1899. A Hawfinch’s nest, which was found in Clifton on 
May 26th, contained three incubated eggs, and was built nearly at the top 
of a good-sized sycamore close to the roadside. The hen sat close, and the 
nest was only discovered by accident. The Merlins made another attempt 
to breed on the Grouse moors of North Derbyshire, but the nest with four 
eggs (almost hatching) was found, and I believe both birds were trapped. 
A Common Sandpiper’s nest found on June 17th, with two eggs chipping 
and two newly-hatched young, was placed on the side of the railway 
embankment between Clifton and Norbury, only eight feet from the metals. 
The old bird was running along the sleepers, and only took wing when a 
passing train was within a few yards of it. ‘The eggs which were chipped 
had the largest fragments of the broken shells neatly fitted on to the small 
ends. The nest was about one hundred and fifty yards or so from the River 
Dove. On Aug. 4th two large white birds flew over Clifton at a good 
height, which were almost certainly Gannets. ‘The previous day had been 
very stormy.— Francis C. R. Jourpain (Clifton Vicarage, Ashburne, 
Derbyshire). 


432 THE ZOOLOGIST 


Ornithological Notes from the Wilsden District (Yorkshire).— 

Pratincola rubicola. Stonechat.—A male bird was seen near Keighley 
last Easter. It is somewhat curious that this species should so seldom 
make its appearance in this district, which seems so very suitable in every 
respect, and scarcely at any other season except early spring, and excep- 
tionally rare as a nesting species. 

Sylvia curruca. Lesser Whitethroat.— Although regarded as being 
generally distributed in Yorkshire, it is a very rare and local visitant to this 
neighbourhood, only two instances having come to our knowledge—one 
found by two of my sons in Beckfoot Lane, near Bingley, some years ago ; 
and, curiously enough, I found a nestling last year (1899) within a few yards 
of the same place. 

Phylloscopus rufus. Chiffchaff. — Exactly the same remarks apply to 
this species as the Stonechat. A few years ago a clutch of eggs were 
brought to me, which had been taken in Bingley Woods, which bore 
a striking resemblance to this species, and might have been so; if 80, it is 
the only instance known to me of its breeding here. 

P. trochilus. Willow-Wren.— A gamekeeper was describing a nest 
to me the other day which he had found built against the trunk of an oak 
at least two yards from the ground, and in all probability was referable 
to this species. I have found the nest in two instances built at some 
distance from the ground. 

Locustella nevia. Grasshopper-Warbler. — One of my sons heard 
this bird last May in the Aire Valley, near Bingley. It may breed here 
more commonly than is supposed, but I have never been so fortunate as to 
find its nest. 

Lanius excubitor. Great Grey Shrike. — One was shot in the Goit 
Stock Valley last autumn, and another killed in the same valiey some twenty 
years ago; these, with one seen near Shipley by my brother and myself, are 
the only records. 

Muscicapa atricapilla. Pied Flycatcher.— One (male) observed last 
May (1900) by one of my sons near Bingley. Occasionally seen on migra- 
tion, but very rarely breeds. It is, however, local but abundant in the next 
valley (Wharfedale). 

Coccothraustes vulgaris. Hawfinch.— Saw two individuals last year 
(1899) in Bingley Wood. One of my sons and myself, a few weeks ago, 
found two nests within a short distance of each other in Wharfedale. 
There is no doubt about its extending its range northwards, as it is much 
more common than even a few years ago. 

Carduelis elegans. Goldfinch.—Seen by one of my sons near Bingley 
last winter. Rather an irregular winter visitant with us. It is said to 
have nested here formerly, but does not now. 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 433 


Linota cannabina. Linnet.—Much lesss common than formerly, but 

the partial disappearance of whin-covers may to some extent account for 
their comparative scarcity. 

} L. flavirostris. Twite-—Even more striking in its scarcity as compared 

with former years, and more unaccountably so than the last species. 

Loxia curvirostra. Crossbill.—A pair were seen last May or June 
(1899) in Upper Wharfedale, but I cannot ascertain that any nest was 
actually found, although it is probable it may have occurred in the beautiful 
_ pine-woods which abound there. 

— Sturnus vulgaris. Starling. — A few more appear to winter with us 
than formerly, although much more abundant both in winter and summer 
in some years than others. It often leaves its breeding haunts where 
it can be observed in colonies without any apparent reason. Mr. Forrest, 
in ‘ The Zoologist’ (ante, p. 140), remarks :—‘ Careful observation has 
convinced me that a very large proportion of Starlings, perhaps one-half, 
_ rear only one brood in the year.” In this district it is practically single- 
_brooded. A few may not improbably have two broods in one season, but 
such instances are rare. A good many are sometimes seen in flocks when 
others are breeding, and have been for some time, but, as the season 
advances, gradually disappear, perhaps to breed in higher latitudes ; and it 
may be more apparent than real that a good many “ never breed at all.” I 
have been asked if three Starlings occasionally feed the young belonging to 
one nest ; one person here stoutly maintains he has repeatedly had ocular 
demonstration of the fact. Although it is not at all an uncommon thing to 
see three birds about one nest, I have never once been satisfied that more 
than two ever engaged in feeding the young. 

Dendrocopus major. Great Spotted Woodpecker. — Has been more 
than usually common of late years; whilst the Green Woodpecker, on the 
other hand, has become much scarcer—indeed, I have not observed a single 
Specimen for some years. 

D. minor. Lesser Spotted Woodpecker.—A very rare visitant. One, 
however, was seen in Bingley Wood last May, and the keeper thinks 
it may be breeding, as he saw it again only the other day. It is about 
twenty years since last record for this district. 

Cuculus canorus. Cuckoo.—During the past year (1899), and up to the 
present, the only species of birds which have come to my knowledge in the 
nests of which the Cuckoo has deposited its eggs are the Meadow-Pipit and 
Whinchat. It seldom lays its egg or eggs in any other species except these 
two in this district. I recently found a young Cuckoo nearly fully fledged 
in the nest of a Titlark. One of my sons observed that the foster-parents 
were feeding it chiefly upon the heath-moth. A good many years ago, on 
a heathy waste near here, I watched a Cuckoo come repeatedly to the nest 


a 


434 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


of a Whinchat—at least, I should think, a dozen times—and then flew away ; 
but at last, on going up to the nest, I found it had deposited an egg. The 


nest was in such a position, access being by a long narrow winding passage, - 


that it could not have been deposited in the nest in the usual way, but 
must have been conveyed by the beak ; and, as far as I can remember, one 
egg of the Whinchat was missing. I think that there can be little doubt 
but that it occasionally robs birds’ eggs ; but the question arises—‘“ Is it a 
common habit to rob eggs except from nests where it intends to deposit its 
egg?” Our evidence on this point is decidedly in the negative. Nests of 
various species abound on Blackhills, where the Cuckoo is also abundant, 
and very seldom an egg is missing from any nest; and it is certain, if eggs 
constituted an important item in its bill of fare, such a propensity could not 
so long have escaped notice. One thing is certain, viz. that it very seldom 
selects a nest in which to deposit its egg where the eggs are in an advanced 
stage of incubation ; and this suggests another question, wiz. ** How does the 
Cuckoo ascertain when the eggs are fresh; or, rather, when such condition 
obtains as to induce her to deposit her egg?” 

Asio otus. Long-eared Owl.—A nest was found with young in May 
(1899) in a fir-tree, but as a breeding species it is not at all common ; per- 
haps, however, more so than formerly. 

Falco esalon. Merlin.—A friend brought one here last winter, which 
was presumed to have flown against the telegraph-wires, and in a few days 
became as tame as one which had been brought up from the nest. It 
could eat enormous quantities of food for its size. 

Eudromias morinellus. Dotterel.— Mr. Ellison, of Steeton, having 
informed me that this species had bred recently on the moors above Keighley, 
a young bird having been sent to Mr. Mosley, of Huddersfield, for identifi- 
cation, I wrote to Mr. Mosley, requesting him to furnish me with any 
particulars in his possession. He replied stating that the young bird in 
question was certainly a Dotterel, but that there was,no ground for coming 
to the conclusion that it must of necessity have been bred in the vicinity 
where it was caught, as in his opinion, judging from its size, it could have 
flown from some distance. Mr. Walker, of Appletrewick, in Upper Wharfe- 
dale, informs me that it has bred near there for two or three years, which 
is rather an unlikely habitat—E. P. BurrerFievp (Wilsden, Yorkshire). 


PISCHES. 
Opah at the Shetlands.—An Opah, or Sun-fish (Lampris luna), was 
caught at West Voe, Dunrossness, on the mainland, on July 20th.—T. 
EKpmonDsTon Saxby (Halligarth, Unst, Shetland). 


r 
Tee 


a ee 


( 485 ) 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


Yearbook of the United States Department of Agriculture, 1899. 
Washington: Government Printing Office. 


Tue Government of the United States of America is to-day 
a greater scientific publisher than that of any other State in the 
world. Its voluminous Reports are also scattered with the 
greatest generosity in every scientific centre, and though the 
term “exchange”’ is used, the actual debit must be largely on 
the side of our American cousins. We have just received the 
above, consisting of 880 pages, strongly bound and beautifully 
illustrated, and though of the greatest importance to the agri- 
culturist, its zoological information is not inconsiderable. In 
noticing three contributions only, it must be understood that 


they appertain to our special studies, and are for that reason 


selected. 

““Some Examples of the Development of Knowledge con- 
cerning Animal Diseases” is the title of a contribution by Mr. 
D. EK. Salmon. ‘This paper is necessarily largely pathological, 
but it is a full and excellent réswmé of the evolution of scientific 
methods and discoveries; while its estimate of the earlier theories 
as structures without stability, representing ‘‘ the individual 
workings of the philosopher's mind rather than the truths of 
nature,” will apply to much thought of the present day. 

“Progress in Economic Entomology in the United States ”’ 
is the subject of a'paper by Dr. L. O. Howard. At the beginning 
of the present century the United States, with its population of 
only 5,000,000, and its restricted husbandry, suffered compara- 
tively little from the attacks of insects on its crops. But now 
the conditions are vastly altered. Increased cultivation has been 
accompanied by a multiplication of plant-eating insects; many 
pests have been imported ; and now, as “ the century has grown 
older, the need of. remedies against insects has grown greater,” 
The State has not, however, neglected its duties. ‘‘ During the 


436 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


calendar year 1898, for example, sixty-one separate publications 
were issued by the different State experiment stations, either 
devoted entirely to matter on economic entomology, or contain- 
ing articles upon the subject, the total number of pages on applied 
entomology reaching nearly 1400. During the same period 
nineteen separate publications on economic entomology were 
issued by the Department of Agriculture, containing a total of 
about 1000 printed pages.”” A notice of some of the principal 
workers is given, and excellent photographs of Asa Fitch, Town- 
end Glover, T. W. Harris, B. D. Walsh, and C. V. Riley will be 
welcomed by many entomologists; while ‘‘ Remedies” will be 
valued by the agriculturist. 

Mr. T. S. Palmer has written ‘“‘A Review of Economic 
Ornithology in the United States.” The history of American 
ornithology may be traced back to the middle of the sixteenth 
century, though a great starting point may be established by the 
publication of Catesby’s ‘ Nat. Hist. of Carolina, Florida,’ &c., 
in 1731-48. <A host of well-known names can be recalled since 
that time, but it appears to be only about the year 1850 that 
economic ornithology attracted attention. ‘As a result of 
fourteen years’ work, the Biological Survey has brought together 
a collection of about 32,000 bird stomachs, of which some 14,000 
have been examined. This article constitutes a fund of infor- 
mation respecting the destruction of birds by excessive egg 
collection, and by the demand for feathers established by 
feminine vanity. 


Bulletin of the United States Fish Commission. Vol. xviii. for 1898. 
Washington: Government Printing Office. 


Tuts is really a lovely quarto volume, with its exquisite views 
of Alaskan lakes and scenery, and is a storehouse of information 
on many branches of economic ichthyology. A large section is 
devoted to ‘The Salmon and Salmon Fisheries of Alaska,”’ and 
this portion is, apart from its zoological information, a practical 
guide to the waterways of the country. The account of ‘‘ The 
Southern Spring Mackerel Fishery of the United States” is 
replete with interest, and is written by Mr. Hugh M. Smith. 
The schools of Mackerel usually approach the coast of the United 


~——— a 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 437 


States in the latter part of March or early in April, and are 
generally first seen by the fishermen off the coast of North 


_ Carolina, in the region of Cape Hatteras. ‘The year 1885 was a 


remarkable one in annals of American fishing; it was a period 
of glut in Mackerel. About 175 vessels were engaged in the 
fishery, and to New York alone probably no fewer than 850 trips, 


: all told, were made; these averaged from 140 to 150 barrels 


each, so that during the season about 125,000 barrels of fresh 
Mackerel were landed in that city, this quantity representing 
about 31,250,000 fish. 

The reappearance of the Tile-fish (Lopholatilus chameleonticeps) 
is detailed by Dr. Bumpus. Most naturalists are familiar with 


_ the facts of the recent sudden appearance and subsequent dis- 


appearance of this fish ; and it was included by Mr. F. A. Lucas 
in his memoir on “ Animals recently extinct or threatened with 
extermination, as represented in the Collections of the U.S. 
National Museum.” Recent investigations have shown that the 
area of the distribution of the Tile-fish “ probably extends from 
69° to 73° west longitude, and along a band of the sea bottom of 
varying width, and from seventy to eighty fathoms in depth, 
although no tests were made in deeper water.” It is also clearly 
a “‘warm water ’’ fish. 

The usual American enterprise has been exhibited in all 
things pertaining to economic ichthyology. ‘The demand for 
fresh Herring as bait in the Cod fisheries led, in 1890, to the 
building of a number of freezing-houses along the New England 
coast, where shore Herrings are frozen during the fall, and kept 
for use during the winter and early spring; while ‘‘ The Mussel 
fishery and pearl-button industry of the Mississippi River,” already 
referred to in the pages of the ‘ Zoologist’ (1899, p. 480), receives 
ample and well-illustrated treatment, and again proves that man’s 
interference with nature has not yet reached its full dimensions. 


438 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 


Two notices of changed feeding habits in birds found in South and Hast 
Africa have recently been published. The first, by Prof. K. Ray Lankester, 
appeared in ‘ Nature’ (Aug. 16th), and refers to the common Rhinoceros- 
bird (Buphaga erythrorhyncha), as observed by Capt. Hinde, of the British 
Kast African Protectorate. This bird formerly fed on Ticks and other 
parasites which infest game and domestic animals; occasionally, if an 
animal had a sore, the birds would probe the sore to such an extent that it 
sometimes killed the animal. Since the cattle plague destroyed the im- 
mense herds in Ukambani, and nearly all the sheep and goats were eaten 
during the late famine, the birds, deprived of their food, have become 
carnivorous, and now any domestic animal not constantly watched is killed 
by them. Perfectly healthy animals have their ears eaten down to the bone, 
holes torn in their backs and in the femoral regions. The second report 
relates to the South African Vulture, and is contributed to the ‘ Field’ of 
Sept. lst by H. L. Lempriere, of Natal. He writes :—‘‘It is probable 
that the disappearance of the enormous herds of game that used to roam at 
will over the veld has caused a change of habit in this bird, and that the 
scarcity of carrion has forced it to seek its food in a manner so unnatural 
and abhorrent as to cause every man’s hand to be turned against it. Be 
that as 1t may, the fact remains that, as surely as the lambing season comes 
round, so surely large flocks of Vultures appear, and, circling and wheeling 
in the air above the ewes, seize the opportunity when the poor creatures are 
in their most helpless condition to attack them, pick out their eyes, and 
eventually kill both lamb and ewe with the most frightful torture conceiv- 
able. Only the most unremitting care and attention during the lambing 
season can prevent the most serious losses from this cause, and the rifle and 
shot-gun, and even poison, are freely used to destroy these repulsive birds. 
Nor are ewes the only victims. Foaling mares are killed in the same 
frightful manner, and I have personally seen a flock of Vultures following 
on the ground a heifer that was about to calve, awaiting their opportunity. 
The plaintive lowing of the terrified beast attracted my attention, and I 
was fortunately able, by the aid of a few well-placed bullets, to prevent 
auother tragedy of the veld by dispersing the loathsome crew.” 


THE breeding of the Cuckoo in the London district is now a well- 
established fact. Mr. C. J. Cornish, writing from Orford House, Chiswick . 


- BDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 439 


*Mall, to the ‘ Times,’ at the end of July, states :—** For some years Cuckoos 


have been in the habit of visiting the osier-bed on Chiswick Eyot very 


early in the morning. This eyot runs into the London county boundary. 


I always suspected that they were seeking nests to lay their eggs in. Three 


_weeks ago, when on the lawn by this house by the river, I heard a young 
Cuckoo screaming for food in a privet-bush hanging over the river. Looking 
-among the thick branches with a glass, I could see its orange maw, and two 


unhappy Sedge-Warblers working overtime putting food down its throat. 


It was fully fledged, and could fly. For three weeks this bird has remained 


in this and adjacent gardens by the river, being fed all the time by the 
Sedge-Warblers. Every evening it took a flight up and down the river, 
apparently practising and testing its strength. When hungry it screeched 
at the rate of just one hundred screeches per minute, which had such an 


_ effect on the nerves of other birds that I have seen even the irreclaimable 


Sparrows fly down, peck up food, and fly into the thick bush where it was, 
though I did not see them feed it. ‘In July away he fly’ is part of Cuckoo 


lore. It is now known that the young Cuckoos leave first. This oue, 


whose evening flights have been daily more extended, has gone. I dare say 
among the birds of Chiswick EKyot it is regretted as a ‘ fashionable departure.’ ” 


THE above was at once supplemented, in the ‘ Daily Mail,’ by Mr. A. E. 
Day, of Highgate Hill, who wrote :—* Mr. Cornish’s young Cuckoo at Chis- 
wick is not unique. Young Cuckoos have been hatched in Highgate Cemetery 
this year. In one instance several of us watched a Hedge-Sparrow’s nest in 
which a Cuckoo had laid an egg, and the little bird sat and hatched out that 
one egg. Although the bird left the nest on July 23rd, it may still be seen 


flying about the cemetery, fed by the Hedge-Sparrows. At least two Cuckoos, 


to my knowledge, have been hatched here this season.” 


Tux reintroduction of the Great Bustard (Otis tarda) seems to be in- 
augurated in Norfolk, and the following letter from Lord Walsingham has 
appeared in the ‘ Norfolk Chronicle’: — 

“ Sir,—An attempt is being made to reintroduce the Great Bustard in 
what was formerly one of the favourite haunts of this fine bird on the bor- 


_ ders of the Norfolk fens. This effort is due to the public spirit of an 


English gentleman resident abroad, whose love of natural history has 
induced him to incur considerable expense and trouble in the matter. It 
is hoped that residents in Norfolk and Suffolk will agree to respect the 
birds, which will probably be at large before this letter appears, and by pre- 
venting their destruction will secure the success of an experiment to which 
the reintroduction of the Capercailzie in Scotland affords a parallel instance 


_ and an encouraging precedent.—WatsincHam. Aug. 14th.” 


440 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


We trust that these birds may be allowed to survive, though as a com- 
mentary to the desire we extract the following note from ‘ The Shooting 
Times’ (Aug. 25th):—‘* A Portsmouth sportsman thought he had made a 
lucky haul a few days ago. His eagle eve detected five fine Storks dis- 
porting themselves on a local waste, and, after much trouble, he succeeded 
in stalking them, and bagged the lot. He took the rare birds to a taxi- 
dermist, and a day or two later learned that the Storks had escaped from 
Sanger’s circus, which was visiting the neighbourhood.” 


We regret to learn the death of Dr. John Anderson, M.D., F.R.S., 
which took place very suddenly at Buxton on Aug. 16th. For the follow- 
ing particulars we are largely indebted to the ‘ Athenzeum.’ John Anderson 
was born in Edinburgh in 1833. He was educated for the medical pro- 
fession, and in 1861 took the degree of M.D. of Edinburgh University. 
His strong taste for natural history, however, led him definitely to abandon 
his career as a medical man when, in 1864, he was offered the curatorship 
of the newly founded Indian Museum in Calcutta. In 1868, and again in 
1874, he was selected by the Government of India to act as scientific 
officer to an expedition into Western China; and in 1881 he was sent by 
the Trustees of the Indian Museum to investigate the fauna of the Mergui 
Archipelago in Tenasserim. Since his return from India, in 1887, Dr. 
Anderson, acting under medical advice, speut the winters in the south, aud 
his periodical visits to Algeria and Egypt roused in him an interest in the 
fauna of North Africa and Arabia, which has proved of the greatest benefit 
to science. He defrayed the costs of a collector to accompany Mr. Theodore 
Bent’s expedition to the Hadramaut; and of late years much of his wealth 
and time has been devoted to the preparation of a series of volumes upon the 
vertebrate zoology of Egypt, which his untimely death leaves uncompleted. 


Tue friends of the late Sir William Flower, K.C.B. (Director of the 
Natural History Museum and President of the Zoological Society of Lon- — 
don), are anxious to place a memorial of his great services to science in the 
Whale Room of the Natural History Museum—one of the departments in 
which he was most interested, and to which he devoted special care and 
attention. The memorial would, subject to the consent of the Trustees of 
the Museum, consist (probably) of a bust and a commemorative brass tablet. 
It is thought that Sir William Flower’s many friends and admirers would 
be glad to associate themselves with this undertaking. In order to carry it 
out an influential Committee has been formed. Subscriptious may be paid 
to the Treasurer, Dr. P. L. Sclater, at 3, Hanover Square, London, W. It 
has been agreed that each subscription shculd not exceed £2 2s. 


se ee eee ee eee 


THE ZOOLOGIST 


No. 712.—October, 1900. 


SHA-ELEPHANTS ON KERGUELEN’S LAND. 


By Roperr HaAuu. 


In the summer of 1897-98 I paid a visit, in the brig ‘Edward,’ 


to this island of the South Indian Ocean. I did so by the 


invitation of Mr. Hans Gundersen, and acted in the capacity of 
naturalist. 
While doing research work I could not but notice certain 


_ habits in the lives of the enormous amphibious mammals, and a 


few general remarks thereon may prove interesting. 
The southern Seals are not so strong in species as those of 
the northern seas. The distribution of the total twenty-five 


_ species, including a Walrus, is four in the southern hemisphere, 


and twenty in the northern. One is peculiar to both, and this is 
the one under present consideration, and specially called Macro- 
rhinus leoninus. It is to be found in California, and is probably 


-circumpolar in the Australis.* 


Certain of the Seals are very local, and have reached peculiar 
places on the earth. One is confined to the Caspian Sea, and 


* This animal was described and figured from the Falkland Islands in 


- our last volume (Zool. 1899, p. 885). It was there referred to under the 


specific name of Macrorhinus elephantinus. In using the specific appella- 
tion M. leoninws Mr. Hall is in agreement with the late Prof. Flower, as 
pointed out in our pages (ibid. p. 387). Mr. Hall, in his opinion that the 


- northern and southern species are identical, is in opposition to some other 


authorities. Mr. Allen, in his ‘ North American Pinnipeds,’ treats the Cali- 


fornian animal as a distinct species (MM. angustirostris).—ED. 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., October, 1900. 24H 


442 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


another to Lake Baikal, each bearing characters apart from all 
others of the Pinnipedia. 

A considerable trade in the skins of these animals annually 
passes through the sales-rooms in Europe, and Bears, Leopards, 
Lions, and Elephants are vernacular names with which the various ~ 
markets are familiar. Seals are eared or earless. Of the former 
there are nine species; of the latter, fifteen species ; and an inter- 
mediate mammal, familiarly known as the Walrus, completes the 
complement. 

Kerguelen’s Land is a large island of about ninety miles by forty 
miles, and full of fjords, on the coasts of which the Sea-Elephants 
congregate in number, more especially on the west coast, where they 
are secure, owing to its ruggedness, dangerous winds, and cur- 
rents. Itis thought they arrive to rear a family in August, and our 
observations lead us to believe the departure is timed for February 
and March. During these months they are very restless, and 
remain no longer the listless creatures of December. A Sea- 
Elephant is contrary in nature to a Sea-Lion, for, while the 
former on this island is docile and languid, the latter on the 
Aucklands is active and savage. ‘The Elephant, on observing a 
stranger, shows a restless eye, but quickly goes to sleep again. 
You may then walk through a herd of fifty sleeping animals, and 
merely disturb one or two for a moment. These hot-blooded 
creatures vary in size from 6 ft. to 20 ft. 6 in., and we found a 
skeleton of a young one about 4 ft. in length. The largest were 
exceedingly difficult to handle; but, as the enterprise of our ship 
was principally a commercial one, the business faculty was quickly 
brought to bear upon any awkward and unwilling customer. 

Many of the animals would weight approximately two to six 
tons. No five men could turn a large bull over without special 
levers, and it needed seven sealers to haul half a skin along the 
sand to the boat in waiting. As for dragging a whole skin, that 
was quite out of the question under the circumstances. For 
museum purposes we made a preparation of one, and this we feared 
would break the tackle while being drawn on board from the end of 
a tow-line. Its length was only 14 ft. 9in., with a girth of 10 ft. 
10 in. about the pectoral girdle. From shoulder to shoulder it 
measured 5 ft. 6in. The circumference at the base of the flippers 
was 3 ft. 6 in. 


SHA-ELEPHANTS ON KERGUELEN’S LAND. 443 


To the great bulk there was a mouth, with a breadth, at the 
angle, of 9 in. only, and a tongue (which we found later to be 
excellent eating) quite filled it. Dr. Stirling has this specimen 
mounted in the South Australian Museum. While the blubber 
nges from 2 to 6 in. in depth, it varies in weight. Six men were 
employed in changing the position of one fatty skin while on the 
skinning-board. This is a fair example of a male, which is 
always larger than the female. The congregation in harbours 
was generally systematic. ‘The bulls occupied one part of the 
beach, and the cows formed a colony in another. There were 
always several colonies in a harbour, and they seldom appeared 
to intermingle, The young were not numerous. They had 
probably set out on their southerly migration before our arrival 
on Dec. 27th, or were scattered promiscuously along the beaches. 
It is the general impression that these mammals lie in their 
-rookeries for days or weeks together, and do not feed otherwise than 
on their fatty tissue. With this view I do not altogether agree, 
for most of the Seals are daily to be seen in the water, either 
: coming in with the full flood, or going out with the early part of an 
ebb tide. That a young Sea-Hlephant, 6 ft. in length, can live a 
month on its own fat was proved by one we brought to Melbourne, 
and which was lodged in the aquarium, but died a few months later. 
: One day as many as eighty may be counted ; the next day the 
same beach may only contain ten, with other heads poking above 
the floating-weed, and showing glassy round black eyes quite 
wide awake. Our men have often shot as many as sixty at one 
time, and found next day another twenty had come up among the 
dead, simply because it was their chosen lair. This species dis- 
likes expending energy on land, and they will lie in a group of 
twenty to sixty in some grassy spot with a sandy landing. Some 
few will ascend to an inclined distance of one hundred and fifty 
yards, and there they are not so active as those below, and 
probably do not go out daily. The energy would be too much 
for them, as they are slow crawlers, using only two flippers, and 
the snake-like action of vertebre and muscles. 
The first anchorage of the brig was at Royal Sound, and 
before we removed from a beach of four miles in extent we had 
collected 426 skins. Our two anchors were lifted for a second 


harbour on Jan. 17th (Greenland Harbour). 
2H2 


444 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


During the first day sixty to seventy were killed, and similar 
results often followed. To shoot more at one time was inadvis- 
able. An average of forty per day was considered good, and this 
allowed time to ship and “ speck,” i.e. take the blubber from the 
skin. 

The finest herd we visited just before leaving the island. 
In all there were twenty-four magnificent animals, roughly 
averaging 19 ft. in length. For the first time, in 904 Seals, 
I saw the rugged nose of ‘‘ Anson’s plate,’”’ figured in Mose- 
ley’s ‘ Challenger Notes’ (p. 201). The plate of Leseur, repro- 
duced on p. 202 of the same work, does not quite agree with the 


Disturbed rest. The rear animal is in the act of roaring: the one with the 
convex back exhibits the inflated nose-bladder: the nearest animal is 
sleeping. 


animals noticed by us in respect to the eyebrow bristles. The 
‘* Hlephants”’ here have no conspicuous eyebrow, but rather have 
the cheek-hairs more developed than this plate exhibits. Before 
introducing ourselves I noticed one great ‘‘ Klephant” take a 
short cut over another, and a quarrel arose. Both growled and 
stood partly supported by their shoulder flippers. Another dis- 
agreement arose elsewhere, but it seems to me there is more bark 
than bite, as animosity is quickly lost in sleep. One unfortunate 
animal had a badly torn nose, in all probability a dental evidence 


SHA-ELEPHANTS ON KERGUELEN'’S LAND. 445 


of past troubles. One of the crew gave me a tooth some 7 in. in 
length, the greater portion of which lies within the gum (e.g. 
49 in.). When disturbed the belching of each of these old bulls 
was objectionably strong, for it can scarcely be called a roar. So 
great is the exertion that blood appears in the pharynx, and this 
occurred when I was engaged near its head, measuring the trough 
in which it lay. This lair along the convex part part was 32 ft. 
in length, the breadth 7 ft., tapering towards each end. The 
depth of these, mostly dry mud holes placed among the grasses, 
ranges to about 2 ft., seldom deeper; but they were placed in 
natural depressions, 7. ¢. extra to the artificial ones. Many of 
the troughs are continuous, and intersect each other, so that a 
large lair may appear netted, which is uncommon.* This place 
soon showed an unfortunate change. Rifles were presented 
within six feet of each bull, and the bullet sped through the 
brain-box, partly flattening on the blubber of the opposite side. 
Now, slits with sharp knives are run dorsally in the long direc- 
tion, and out rushes venous-like blood to stain the little bay ina 
few minutes. From one Seal some sixty fountains of blood rose 
in oblique directions to a height of two feet, and all from the 
single cut on the back. Against the sky-line this miniature 
double line of fountains looked strange, and the spray of a city 
corporation water-van is not to be compared to its delicate and 
coloured sprayings. In the viscera I was surprised at the length 
of the small intestine, which I found to be 255 ft. in length, and 
capable of rough haulage. It stood the pulling over the grass 
from the carcase with only a small distension. 

The method of procuring ‘‘ Elephants” is a simple, though 
not an easy one. Three boats, each with a crew of five men, row 
from the anchorage to the shore, haul up their boats, prospect 

the field, and, with four loaded rifles, drive the animals down to 
within a few yards of high-water mark, and shoot them. There 
they lie for the coming of the tide, and get anchored temporarily 
in a few feet of water. Some of the Seals give considerable 
trouble before they will leave the high lands (one hundred yards 
from the beach on a medium incline), and as many as three hours 


: 
| 


* In one trough there are very often two bulls or two cows, the broad 
part of one and the tapering part of another at one end, and the corresponding 
parts towards the opposite pole. This ensures the trough being well filled, 


446 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


may be spent in annoying them with the lance before they decide 
to go. If the Seals carry their own skins down it saves much 
labour and time of the men. The boating is quite enough 
trouble to bear, as the harbour winds are treacherous and 
strong; so powerful are they, that I have observed half the body 
of a ‘‘ waterfall” blown back many yards before it could leave the 
ledge where gravity was strongest. Should a gale prohibit the 
boats leaving the ship, the crew will sleep in during the day, and 
with the lull towards midnight leave for the scene of operations. 
Many a time they have had to row miles against a tempest to save 
being out all night, and many hours it has taken. Under such 
conditions boats have been swamped, the skins floated overboard, 
and a landing arranged for fresh efforts. I shall not be likely to 
forget one intensely cold night while going on board with my 
birds and cameras. The helmsman got a renewed attack of 
tropical fever, and, almost collapsing, I was given charge of the 
helm. For three hours mittens and oilskins seemed like miser- 
able calico, and then I fully sympathised with the men who had 
their wellingtons partly filled with icy water. 

Daily the boats wend their way in much the same manner, 
and in exactly the same way the skins are taken from the bodies. 
Roughly speaking, each skilful man can skin the smaller Seals— 
ten in two hours and a half, or fifteen minutes for each. This 
time is for animals which are not too large for a man to handle. 
The carcases in our takings were generally of large size. The 
following is a case of quick work :—After a one o’clock dinner 
(of plum-duff) the boats were rowed three miles. Seventy-two 
Seals were killed, and all but fourteen skinned. Twenty-three of 
the largest were taken on board, and the last was upon the wind- 
lass at 9.30 p.m. ‘Two skins of fair size are enough for a small 
boat, or one of a large bull. The last trip in the above raid took 
two hours and a half in rowing three miles; this wasted time and 
much more was spent in endeavouring to get round a certain 
point. We agreed without a dissenting voice to call this head- 
land Cape Horn of Royal Sound. 

This uncharitable point is the type of many another. To 
leave a harbour for a second one is the event most trying to 
the constitution, for one never knows until the anchor is safely 
dropped where the howling wind will drive you. Altogether we 


ee 


SHA-ELEPHANTS ON KERGUELEN’S LAND. 447 


_ tried six harbours, of which four were well worked. The fifth 
_ (Swains Bay) took us three days to enter, and, after being ten 
_ minutes inside trying to get up the channel, our clever captain 


put his ship about, and thanked his lucky stars he had got safely 
out of the treacherous “hole.” Down this fjord the wind without 
notice struck the foresails, while the wind astern drove her for- 


_ward. Here the trouble started, but fortunately quickly ended 


by good management and good fortune. Had we touched the 
entrance island the ship would at once have been broken into 
matchwood. From this place I carried pleasant recollections, 
more on account of the bold contour and strangeness of the island 


than because it pleased my friends to chart it as a tribute to 


myself. Strange as it may read, among the finding of shipwreck 
remains there were letters and bottles from a sealing captain 
mentioned in Prof. Moseley’s ‘Challenger Notes’ twenty years 
ago. Capt. Fuller is an old hand at the business, and evidently 
has the indomitable pluck of the American in the making and 
losing of fortunes in rough waters! As for ourselves, we managed 
to quit the land safely on Feb. 18th, although for a few hours we 
could not get over a severe loss we made at the last moment. 


_ Having, on the 17th, killed, skinned, and anchored a batch 


of skins to the value of £250, all hands on board heaved 
anchors next morning to stand into a near bay to take them off. 
Two storms now showed their effects: one in driving all the 
skins ashore and burying them in the sand; the other in driving 
us off the bay altogether. 

With a threatening sky our tight and dry little brig, the 
‘Edward,’ now headed for Melbourne, and we started a direct 
homeward course of 3400 miles. This was duly accomplished in 
twenty-two days, and we experienced a phenomenal wind for the 
latter fourteen days, which was from the north instead of the 
prevailing one from the west, a circumstance of exceedingly rare 
occurrence. 


448 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES rrom SOUTH-WESTERN 
EUROPE. ; 


By Surceon K. Hurusrone Jones, M.B., R.N., F.L.S. 


Ir is particularly to be understood that in writing the present 
article no pretence is made at compiling a list of the birds for the 
localities mentioned. To do so would require much longer periods 
of observation, and fuller acquaintance with their avian fauna 
than have fallen to the lot of the present writer. It being there- 
fore understood that these are merely rough notes, it only 
remains to make a few remarks concerning those portions of 
South-western Europe the birds of which are the object of this 
communication. 

The Channel Squadron, in which the writer had the honour 
to serve, makes, as a rule, two visits annually to the South-west 
of Europe, one in the autumn, and the other in the spring. It 
has been in spare time during these cruises in 1898-9 that these 
notes have been jotted down. 

The places in that portion of Europe under consideration 
which have supplied these notes are Arosa Bay and the neigh- 
bourhood, in the extreme north-west of Spain; Gibraltar, and 
portions of the adjoining Spanish mainland; Lisbon; and Sar- 
dinia. In the autumn of 1898, when, however, only Gibraltar 
and Arosa Bay were visited, not very many notes of the birds 
were taken, as at that time more attention was devoted to the 
Mollusca. In the spring and autumn of 1899, however, much 
fuller observations were made, 

The country around Arosa Bay is widely and roughly culti- 
vated, well-wooded, and thickly populated. It is hilly, but 
possesses no great elevations. The woods, which, though very 
numerous, are for the most part individually small, consist mainly 
of pines, firs, and small oaks. ‘The country is full of elevations 
formed of old red sandstone, and often of most curious shapes, 
resembling strongly the tors of Dartmoor, 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM S.W. EUROPE. 449 


| The mainland in the neighbourhood of Gibraltar is wild, 
- mountainous, and for the most part uncultivated. Trees are 
mainly present in the shape of extensive forests of cork-oaks. 
The population is scanty, and for the most part collected in small 
towns and large villages, and not scattered over the face of the 
land in numerous small homesteads as at Arosa Bay. 

Aranei Bay, in the north of Sardinia, where, during a short 
visit a few records were made, is a very wild and barren spot, 
mountainous, without any large trees, and covered with low-lying 
~ serub. 

Gibraltar is too generally well known to require any special 
description. 

To one whose observations have mainly been confined to the 
British Isles, at first sight the number and boldness of the 
Raptorial birds is quite astonishing. This is of course explained 
_ by the fact that there are no gamekeepers, and practically no 
game-laws; so that birds of prey have every opportunity to 
thrive and multiply. It is also astonishing that, in spite of their 
abundance, Warblers and other small birds are very plentiful. 
Two familiar birds, however—the Rook and the Song-Thrusna— 
are conspicuous by their absence. 


Turdus merula. — Blackbirds are very common in all] the 
localities mentioned above, with the exception of Sardinia, where 
I did not observe them. At Gibraltar they are especially com- 
mon, and one often observed them singing on the wing as they 
flew in a long downward slant from some highly elevated point 
to another lower down the rock. 

Sazicola cnanthe.—The Wheatear was first observed at Gib- 
raltar in March, 1899, when a fair number were about the rock. 

_ They disappeared, however, at the beginning of April, and when 

the Squadron returned, after a month’s absence in May, not one 
was to be seen. Probably they were birds on migration. Both 
at Arosa Bay and in Sardinia this bird was not uncommon. 

Pratincola rubetra.—The Whinchat was only observed in the 
neighbourhood of Algeciras, on the Spanish mainland opposite 
to Gibraltar, where it was first noticed on April 8th. Apparently 
it was present in fair numbers. 

Ruticilla phenicurus,—A few pairs of Redstarts were noticed 


450 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


at Gibraltar in the autumn of 1898, but at the corresponding 
season in 1899 they were extremely plentiful and very tame. 

R. titys.—One pair of Black Redstarts was noted in Novem- 
ber, 1898, but, like the preceding species in 1899, the birds were 
very much more plentiful than in the year previous. 

Erithacus rubecula.—Robins are common both at Arosa Bay 
and around Lisbon; they are, however, much more shy and 
retiring than in England. A few occur at Gibraltar in the 
winter. 

Daulias luscinia.—Several Nightingales were observed in the 
vicinity of Algeciras in April, 1899; and this bird was also noted 
in Sardinia. Spending a night on one occasion at Algeciras, 
and being unable to sleep on account of the mosquitoes, I was 
astonished to hear a Nightingale singing close to the inn, which 
was quite a quarter of a mile away from gardens of any kind, 
facing the sea, and surrounded on all its other sides by houses. 
Rather a strange place for this bird to sing in, I think. 

Sylvia cinerea.—The Whitethroat is common everywhere ex- 
cepting in Sardinia. In the north of Spain it is apparently 
more plentiful in the spring, and in the south in the autumn. 

S. atricapillaa—The Blackcap-Warbler is fairly common at 
Gibraltar and in its neighbourhood during November and 
December, and around Arosa Bay in the spring. It bred in the 
latter place in some numbers. It also occurs in Sardinia. 

S. hortensis.—The Garden-Warbler was noticed in the Ala- 
meda Gardens at Gibraltar in November and December. At 
Arosa Bay it was observed in May. This species was less 
numerous than the preceding. 

S. sarda.—The Sardinian Warbler is much the commonest of 
its genus at Gibraltar, where great numbers breed among the 
coarse scrub clothing the upper parts of the rock. At Aranei 
Bay, in Sardinia, it was also observed in fair numbers. 

Phylloscopus rufus.—The Chiffchaff was not at all common at 
Arosa Bay in the spring. 

P. sibilatrix.—W ood-Wrens were observed in some quantities 
during the month of November in the Alameda Gardens at 
Gibraltar, and one was seen at Algeciras. 


Acrocephalus phragmitis.—The. Sedge- Warbler was common 
at Arosa Bay in May. 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM S.W. EUROPE. 451 


j Accentor modularis.—At Arosa Bay, but not at all commonly. 

At Gibraltar a variety of the Hedge-Sparrow with very faint and 
indistinct spots occurs. This may be a local race, or without my 
knowledge may have been given specific rank. 

-Parus major.—The Great Tit was only seen twice, once at 
Gibraltar and once at Arosa Bay, and both times in December, 
1899. 

P. ater.—The continental Coal-Tit is very common about 

Arosa Bay, and also at Algeciras and Gibraltar. 

P. palustris—The Marsh-Tit occurs commonly about Arosa 
ays." - ) 

P. ceruleus.—The Blue Tit is common at Arosa Bay, Gibral- 
tar, and Algeciras. In Gibraltar, however, in common with the 
Coal-Tit, it occurs almost entirely in the Alameda Gardens. At 
Algeciras it is only found in the cork woods, as far as my 
observations go. It is rather more numerous, however, in the 
north than the south. 

I did not notice any Paride in Sardinia. 

Troglodytes parvulus. —'The Wren occurs sparingly about 
Arosa Bay. 

Motacilla alba.—The White Wagtail is a summer visitor to 
Arosa Bay, where a few pairs were breeding in May. Lach pair 
had apparently a tract or beat of their own, for one never saw one 
couple very nearanother. At Algeciras a company of three birds 
were noticed in December, 1899, and a single specimen was seen 
on the North Front in Gibraltar in November of the same year. 

M. lugubris.—A few Pied Wagtails were seen about Arosa 
Bay in May, but on Dec. 10th, when the Squadron put in for a 
day at that port, hundreds of these birds were seen, from which 
it seems probable that they were wintering migrants there. 

M. flava.— One pair only seen at Rondo, a town 2500 ft. above 
the sea-level, and about seventy miles inland from Algeciras ; 
and a single specimen at Gibraltar in December, 1899. 
 Anthus pratensis.—The Meadow-Pipit is common at Arosa 
Bay, and less so at Gibraltar in the winter. 

Lanius pomeranus.—The Woodchat Shrike was very common 
at Aranei Bay, in Sardinia, in April. At Gibraltar and Algeciras 
it also occurred, but less commonly than at Aranei. It was first 
noted in the last-named localities in May. 


452 THK ZOOLOGIST. 


Muscicapa grisola.— One pair of Spotted Flycatchers was 
noticed in some small gardens on the North Front at Gibraltar 
in May. A few specimens were also seen at Arosa Bay in the 
same month. 

Hirundo rustica.—T he Swallow was common everywhere, and, 
though naturally only observed at Arosa Bay in the spring, it was 
still present at Gibraltar in the first week of November. At 
Algeciras this bird was nesting, and had full clutches of eggs on 
April 8th. 

Chelidon urbica.—The Martin was as common as the Swallow, 
and occurred for the most part with it; in Sardinia, as far as my 
scanty observation permitted, it seemed much the commoner of 
the two species. 

Cotile rupestris.— The Crag-Swallow was noted in three locali- 
ties only. First, it was seen on a hill on the Spanish mainland 
facing the North Front in the month of November, at an elevation 
of about 500 ft. At Ronda, a town about eighty miles inland from 
Gibraltar, having an elevation of 2500 ft., and divided into two 
parts by a deep narrow gorge called the Tajo. This gorge is 
about 1000 ft. in depth, and there, in company with the Common 
Swallow, this species was observed in hundreds. The birds 
seemed to be very tame, and, besides frequenting the gorge, flew 
in and out among the houses just as the Common Swallows do. 
At Aranei Bay, in Sardinia, a few pairs were observed at the end 
of April hawking about after their prey down at the sea-level, as 
well as up the sides of the hills, and in the valleys. This bird 
was plentiful at Gibraltar in November and December, 1899. 

Carduelis elegans.x—Many Goldfinches were noted at Arosa 
Bay in March, and all were then paired. In May they had ap- 
parently considerably diminished in numbers, probably, however, 
many having gone elsewhere to breed. At Algeciras, in Novem- 
ber, a few specimens were observed, and a flock of five hung 
about the rock at Gibraltar for a few days in March. 

Serinus hortulanus.—The Serin was fairly common at Arosa 
Bay in May, where it was then nesting. 

Ligurinus chloris—Greenfinches were very common at Arosa 
Bay. 

Passer domesticus.—Though fairly common in the towns and 
villages about Arosa Bay and at Algeciras, Sparrows were scarce 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM S.W. EUROPE. 458 


by comparison with their numbers in England. At Gibraltar 
this species is very much more common than in the places men- 
tioned above. 

P. hispaniolensis.—In Sardinia this species replaces the 
Common Sparrow, and is fairly numerous. 

Fringilla ccelebs. —The Chaffinch was common everywhere 
except in Sardinia, where I did not observe it. 

Linota cannabina.—The Linnet was common at Arosa Bay in 
May. 

Pyrrhula europea.—One Bullfinch was observed at Algeciras 
in November. 

Emberiza miliaria.—The Corn-Bunting was fairly common at 
Arosa Bay. 

E. cirlus.—A few Cirl Buntings were seen at Arosa Bay. 

E. hortulana.—The Ortolan Bunting was seen a few times at 
Arosa Bay in May, where it was nesting. 

Sturnus vulgaris.—Starlings occurred at Arosa Bay, but in 
remarkably small numbers, considering how well suited the 
country appeared to be to their wants. Hlsewhere they were 
not seen. 

Pyrrhocorax alpinus.—One specimen seen at Ronda. 

Garrulus glandarius.—Except at Arosa Bay—in the woods 
around which they were fairly common—Jays were not observed. 

Pica rustica.—The Magpie was fairly common at Arosa Bay. 

Corvus corone.—T he Carrion-Crow was by far the commonest 
of this family seen at Arosa Bay, where it swarmed everywhere. 

C. coraz.—There was at least one pair of Ravens breeding on 
the rock at Gibraltar, and probably others were there also. At 
Aranei Bay these birds were very common. 

Alauda arvensis. —Sky-Larks were extremely common every- 
where except in Sardinia. 

A. brachydactyla.—The Short-toed Lark was noted only at 
Ronda. 

Cypselus apus.—The Swift was very common at Gibraltar, 
where it first made its appearance during the last days of March. 
It was also common at Algeciras and about Arosa Bay. 

C. melba.—The Alpine Swift was only noticed twice—a pair 
at Ronda in April, and a single specimen near the signal station 


at the top of the rock at Gibraltar in May. 


454 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Alcedo ispida.—Two Kingfishers were seen—one on a piece 
of brackish water by the road which runs across the neutral 
ground to Linea, and another on a hill-stream some five miles 
inland at Algeciras. | 

Upupa epops.—One solitary Hoopoe was seen in the Alameda 
Gardens at Gibraltar in May. 

Cuculus canorus.—T he Cuckoo occurred at Arosa Bay, Ronda, 
and about Algeciras. It was, however, considerably scarcer than 
it usually is in England. ‘The Spanish peasants call this bird by 
the same name as we do. 

Buteo vulgaris.—Buzzards are very common both in the north 
and south of Spain, more especially in the former. At Arosa 
Bay a nest was found in March within twenty yards of a high 
road, along which constant traffic was passing, and close to a 
fairly large village. The nest was in a small pine-wood, and the 
birds were extremely tame. 

Gyps fulvuus.x—The Griffon Vulture is very common, perhaps 
the commonest Raptorial bird in the south of Spain. As many 
as thirty birds of this species have been noted at one time soaring 
over the outskirts of Algeciras. The birds are very tame, and 
are seen quite close to the railway when trains are passing; and 
about Ronda some of their breeding places are in full view of the 
line, and at no great distance from considerable villages. It is 
interesting to see these birds soar to windward, which they un- 
doubtedly can do. 

Neophron percnopterus.—The Egyptian Vuiture occurs in the 
hills about Algeciras, but is much scarcer than the preceding 
species, and much more shy and retiring. 

Milvus ictinus.—Kites were only observed in the neighbour- 
hood of Lisbon, where they were very common, and often seen 
sailing over the town itself, and attacking garbage on the Tagus. 

Falco peregrinus.—A pair of Peregrines were seen at Gib- 
raltar, and probably had a nest somewhere on the rock. 

F. tinnunculus.—The Kestrel was extremely common in all 
the districts under consideration. About Arosa Bay every one of 
the little tors, and every church tower of any height, was tenanted 
by a pair of these handsome Hawks. At Santiago de Compostela 
at least half a dozen pairs had their quarters in the great cathe- 
dral, and it was a matter of surmise how they found sufficient 


: 
. 
\ 
Mi 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM S8.W. EUROPE. 455 


food, for apparently they did not hawk for prey outside the 


limits of the town. At Gibraltar this species breeds in dozens 


on the great precipice forming the North Front. At Lisbon, 


_ Ronda, Algeciras, and in Sardinia they were also plentiful, 
_ though not nearly so numerous as about Arosa Bay and at 


Gibraltar. . 
F. cenchris.—The Lesser Kestrel was fairly common at Gib- 


raltar and Ronda, where it was associated with the preceding 


species. 

Phalacrocorax carbo.—The Cormorant was common at Arosa 
Bay, Gibraltar, and Aranei Bay. 

P. graculus.—The Shag was common on the eastern front of 
the rock at Gibraltar, and present also, but in less quantity, at 
Aranei Bay, in Sardinia. 

Sula bassana.—Gannets were on rare occasions seen in the 
harbour at Gibraltar, and in the straits outside, more especially 
towards the African side, they were fairly common. Whilst 
coming back to England, in December, 1899, in fairly rough 
weather, numbers of these birds were seen on the coasts of 
Portugal and Spain, whereas at other times of the year I have 
not noticed them there. Off Cape Finisterre, in a strong north- 
west gale, and many miles from land, a flock of about a hundred 
were observed diving with great activity. One or two were 
noticed in Arosa Bay on Dec. 10th. 

Ardea cinerea.—One Heron was seen at Arosa Bay in March. 

Anas boscas.—A. few Mallards were present at Arosa Bay, and 
at Gibraltar a large colony on a piece of artificial water just out- 
side the gates, on the way to the North Front. These birds all 
disappeared with the exception of a few pairs in the spring, and 
the latter remained apparently to breed, as quite young ducklings 
were observed in the beginning of May. 

Columba palumbus.—A few Ring-Doves were observed in the 
cork-woods. 

C. livia.—One pair observed near Caldas de Reyes, at Arosa 
Bay, in March. 

Turtur communis.—Turtle-Doves were first noticed at Arosa 
Bay in May, when they were fairly plentiful throughout that dis- 
trict, and where they were evidently breeding. 

Perdia cinerea.—A few Partridges occurred at Arosa Bay, 


456 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Gibraltar, and Aranei Bay. Probably a few bred on the rock at 
Gibraltar. 

Fulica atra.—A large number of Coots live on the same piece 
of water at the North Front of Gibraltar as the Mallards men- 
tioned above, where they are apparently semi-domesticated. 

Otis tarda.—The Bustard occurs not uncommonly in the 
south of Spain in the open country. 

Gallinago celestis.—Snipe are fairly common in the marshes 
at Arosa Bay in March. 

Totanus hypoleucus. —'Two Sandpipers were noted—one at 
Gibraltar in November, and another near Ronda in April. 

Numenius arquata.—Curlew were plentiful on the shores of 
Arosa Bay in the autumn, and a few were also seen in the spring. 
The last noted was on March 18th, and probably they did not 
breed in the hills in the immediate vicinity. 

Larus ridibundus. — Black-headed Gulls were common at 
Arosa Bay in the autumn and in the early spring, but all dis- 
appeared by the month of May. At Gibraltar this species occurs 
in great numbers in company with the next. 

L. melanocephalus.—The Mediterranean Black-headed Gull 
was only observed at Gibraltar, and in the autumn of 1898. 

L. cachinnans.—Herring-Gulls occur in very great numbers 
both at Arosa Bay and at Gibraltar. At Arosa Bay, in May, all 
the Herring-Gulls had disappeared, but probably they have a 
suitable breeding-place on the coast not far off, for on the weather 
becoming stormy great numbers returned to the bay. 

Rissa tridactyla.—T he Kittiwake is very common at Gibraltar, 
particularly in the winter. It is also observed at sea on the 
coasts of Portugal and Spain in all kinds of weather, in which it 
differs from the Herring-Gull. In December, 1899, several 
Kittiwakes followed the ship in heavy weather about a third 
across the Bay of Biscay, leaving her at Ushant. Off Capes 
Finisterre and St. Vincent they were also, in strong gales, both 
plentiful and active. 

Fratercula arctica. — Numbers of Puffins were observed in 
small flocks in rather rough weather in December, 1899, off 
Capes St. Vincent and Finisterre, as well as in the stretches in 
between them. 

Podicipes fluviatilis.—A pair of Dabchicks were noted on the 


ORNITHOLOGICAL NOTES FROM S.W. EUROPE. 457 


piece of artificial water by the road to the North Front at Gib- 
_raltar in November, 1899. 

Procellaria pelagica.—A pair of Stormy Petrels, blinded by a 
search-light, flew through the port into an officer’s cabin one 
rather dirty night at Gibraltar. 

_ Alea torda.—Razorbills are occasionally seen on the western 
coasts of the Spanish peninsula, 

Uria troile—Guillemots occur like the above, and, if any- 
thing, less commonly. 


These notes are adnuittadly very incomplete, and several more 
species have had to be left out from failure of identification, as 
during the time when most of them were made no guns were 
allowed on shore, and therefore complete identification was im-— 
possible. 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., October, 1900. 91 


458 THE ZOOLOGIST, 


AN OBSERVATIONAL DIARY OF THE HABITS OF 
THE GREAT PLOVER (GDICNEMUS CREPI- 
TANS) DURING SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER. 


By Epmunp SeEtovs. 
(Concluded from p. 277.) 


September 24th.—Left house at 3.20 am. It was bright 
moonlight, with a strong wind. Walked to the amphitheatre, 
and sat down on the edge of it at another place which I thought 
better suited for observation.. Whilst on my way heard the cry 
of a Great Plover (the ground-note) quite near to the road. I 
must have been only a few paces from it when it went up, which 
would never have occurred in the daytime. 

Whilst still moonlight, and before the dawn had broken, 
heard cry of Peewits in the air, and afterwards, in first grey of 
the dawning, that of the Great Plovers, and shortly afterwards 
these birds commenced to fly; first some half dozen, singly, or one 
following another irregularly, and with more or less gap between 
them. They flew from the direction of the river over the amphi- 
theatre and, without alighting on it, continued, just topping the 
bracken, till I lost them over the crest of arise. Have no doubt 
they went to their gathering-place amongst the heather. A rabbit, 
when just light enough to see, jumped extraordinarily high, several 
times in succession, shooting up from amongst the bracken in a 
wonderful way. Soon after sunrise a great number of Peewits 
flew together low over the ground on outer margin of amphi- 
theatre, and then circled around and over it, high in the air, and 
getting gradually higher. Amongst them I now observed a 
Kestrel-Hawk. It was flying with them, the Peewits being 
close together (in a flock) at the time, and, shortly after, he had 
separated a bird from the body (at least the bird became sepa- 
rated), and the two were some time flying together; but I saw no 
active attack on the part of the Hawk. The latter I shortly 
missed, whilst getting them through the glasses, and the Peewit 


| 
| 
| 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 459 


soon after rejoined the flock. Here, again, and in a higher 
degree, it did not seem as if a serious attack was made, or even 
meditated, by the Hawk, for surely he could have struck one out 
of so many birds all around and close to him if he had intended 
to. Was it sport, therefore, or bullying, or affecting to do some- 
thing beyond his strength? Afterwards, when the Peewits were 


walking about, I observed amongst them a Hawk (which I have 


no doubt was the same one, a Kestrel) springing about over the 
ground in an awkward and encumbered manner, which I at first 
attributed to injury, but soon saw that it had something in its 


_ ¢laws which, I suppose, it was overpowering. Unfortunately, 


where it last settled down with its prey, a slight sandy ridge hid 
it from my view. The Peewits, both those which happened 
to be nearest to the Hawk and the flock generally, seemed not in 
the least alarmed, but wholly indifferent. I waited till near ten. 
Quite a small band of Plovers, not rising from the amphitheatre, 


but coming from some other place (not noted), flew over the 


bracken in the direction of the heath, but no further flight took 
place—no grand one, such as I had seen yesterday, and had hoped 
to see again from the moment of rising. 

September 25th.—Rose early, and walked to same place as 
yesterday. 

Small flight of Peewits (i.e. for Peewits—forty or fifty 
perhaps) observed flying, amongst which was a small bird, I 
think a Starling. It flew with them from one part of the 


* flock to another, making, or appearing to make, little dives at 


particular birds. After a minute or so this bird flew back 
towards where the Peewits had risen from, and where a good 
many Starlings and other small birds were also feeding. Mid- 
way it was joined by another bird (either its own species or one 
somewhat smaller), which made wide, curving swoops or flights 


at it, sheering off on point of meeting, and again approaching. 


It is not easy to say what was the feeling—the mental attitude 
of the Starling (for I am pretty sure it was one)—towards the 
Peewits. Was it one of hostility? Was it sympathy? Or was 
it a joyous ora kind of fussy participation in the affairs of the 
latter? TI incline to one of the latter explanations, or, as I think 
probable, to that of a mixture of the two. The attitude of the 


Peewits seemed one of mere indifference. 
212 


460 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Compare, now, the two instances, observed by me, of a Hawk 
first flying with Great Plovers, then with Peewits. The Hawk 
being a bird of prey, an evil intention is, of course, the first and 
most natural hypothesis. He is a “‘ suspect,” and must take the 
consequences (which, here, will not be very serious for him). Yet 
I recall that, even with the Plovers, where this theory seemed 
most tenable, it did not impress me in that way at the time, 
though, on reflection, it seemed more and more likely. There 
(I believe) it was a Sparrow-Hawk, but in the other instance it 
was a Kestrel—and who can credit a Kestrel with having any 
serious designs upon Peewits? Afterwards, when it was on the 
ground, tearing prey, the Peewits all round and about did not 
betray the smallest apprehension. In the case of the Sparrow- 
Hawk with the Plovers, it may have been different; but with 
regard to their actions afterwards, these may have been due to 
myself, for though I lay as flat as I could, yet I was no doubt 
visible, the bank at that part not being clothed with bracken. 
Also, an incident, which I did not trouble to record, had just 
before occurred—viz. that some men with carts on the road, 
seeing me crawling flat in the heather, had thought I had 
broken a leg or otherwise hurt myself, and one of them (a 
delicious rustic) had walked up to me to make sure. This had 
put the birds up. The Hawk incident occurred later, after they 
had gone down again, with a small band of birds that had flown 
up to join them. But being put up once, and seeing me on the 
bank all the time, assuming that they did, may have caused the 
general disquietude I noted, and the Hawk may not have pro- 
duced it. At any rate, here is one instance, as it appears to me, 
of a Hawk flying with a flock of birds for pleasure merely, and 
without a serious design upon them. 

About 7.30 or 8 a small group of the Plovers rose from one 
part of the amphitheatre, and flew to another. In a few minutes 
they again rose, and, after circling about a little, flew away 
towards the heather, going straight towards the accustomed 
place. They numbered twenty-six, for, as they stretched out 
into a long irregular line, I was able to count them. They were 
followed shortly by another flight of thirty-three. But it soon 
appeared that they had not left the one gathering-ground to go 
to the other spontaneously (as I thought had been the case), but 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 461 


that they had been put up, for, shortly after the last flight had 
_ gone, a large drove of cattle, driven by a boy, passed right over 
where they had been. As the time corresponds with that at 
which the flights came up whilst I was watching at the bank, I 
have no doubt that this is the accustomed cause—that the birds, 
having fed during the night, assemble at early dawn in some 
chosen place, where, if not disturbed, they would probably 
_ remain till the evening; but, if put up, fly to join their fellows 
at another such place, probably the nearest. 

Yesterday, being Sunday, the cattle were not driven across, 
and on the stormy morning they may also not have been. Pos- 
sibly it is a not quite regular occurrence. 

I should note that there had been no “dancing” amongst the 
birds whilst at the amphitheatre. 

At 5.30 p.m. (raining, and continued so more or less all the 
time) walked to the bank, and found the birds assembled in the 
heather as before. I wished to see if they performed the same 
antics here, before taking flight, as I had been witness of at the 
amphitheatre. Unfortunately, there are no facilities here for a 
close view, and it was, even from the beginning, difficult to make 
the birds out through the glasses. I assured myself, however, 
that precisely the same thing was going on, and, as I think, 
rather more so than usual,* so that I regretted much not being 
able to see better. I should not, however, speak positively, 
unless I had unmistakably seen some birds dancing in a very 
vigorous manner, and caught the “dreary gleams ’’—now more 
than ever so—very frequently. As the gloom darkened, they 
were difficult to distinguish from the white tails of the rabbits, 
but I do not think I ever confounded them. I now feel sure that 
these antics give expression to the anticipation of going and desire 
to be gone, which begin to possess these birds as evening falls. 
They are the prelude to, and they end in, flight. The two, in 
fact, merge into each other, for short flights, between the antics 
over the ground, are a part of the display (as I have described), 
and it is impossible to say which one of them will be continued 
into the fuil flight. of departure. I also noted that the usual 
long-drawn wailing note which ordinarily precedes both dance 
and flight was, this evening, ushered in by a short, one-syllabled 


** Possibly on account of the rain, 


462 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


note of similar tone, several times repeated, but with well-marked 
intervals sufficiently long to take away its wailing character. I 
have not remarked this before. 

September 26th.—Missed my way over moor, and did not get 
to bank till close on 4. With one doubtful exception, did not 
put up any Plovers during this wandering, though, as I got far 
beyond the bank and can only have passed it, as far as I can see, 
through the broad gap, I must have gone either right over or 
very near the place where they assemble. At 4.45 the first Great 
Plover flew over the bank (flying silently), and, a minute or two 
afterwards, I began to hear the cry. Another followed shortly 
afterwards. It was the very earliest twilight of the morning, the 
moon and stars quite bright, except in the eastern sky, where the 
latter were fading into dawn. 

At 4.55 two more flew over. Then came in the following 
order and number :—1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 2, 4, 1, 3, 1, 5,2, 1; 2. One 
of the last two uttered a short single note of different tone to the 
usual one. It had a scrappiness in it, and was without the wail- 
ing character. One other bird—flying a little before these, the 
other way, and which, I think, was a Great Plover—uttered a short 
single note, repeated, which was again different, nor was it the 
* tir-whi-whi-whi-whi-whi.”’ Otherwise, all flew silently ; but the 
ground-note was now frequent. I had noted a small flock flying 
(and, I think, going down) on the other side of the bank, and the 
cries which I had before heard I attribute to these or other birds 
on the ground, 

It is 5.10, and some five minutes since the last bird flew by. 
Now come 1, 1,1, the last making the full characteristic wail, 
but without the wailing trills and twitters which, I believe, are 
only uttered on the ground. Getting lighter and lighter, and 
birds beginning to avoid me as they fly over the bank, but one of 
last three went quite close by me, without seeming to notice me. 
Then come eleven flying together in a flock, quite silently. Then 
two more. Time 5.17. Forty-nine birds, therefore, as a mini- 
mum, have flown up to this resort between 4.45 and 5.17 a.m. 
I cannot at all say how many may have come invisibly from an 
opposite direction, or how many flying over me I may not have 
observed (though I do not think any). 

5.30.—Is now clear daylight, stars invisible, though moon 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 463 


; ) 

still luminous. After a little, thinking the early morning flight 
home of the birds was now over, I rose to go. As I walked off 
the Plovers all rose from the heath, and I was astonished at their 
numbers. They flew round several times in a wide circle, and as 
they gradually, from the great cloud they had at first formed, 
spread out into something more resembling a line, I was enabled 
to count a considerable number of them. I counted 117, irre- 
_ spective of a large section which separated itself from the rest 
_ and flew off to the amphitheatre, so grouped that I was unable to 
count them. The number of these last must, I should say, at 
least, have made up the balance of another hundred, which 
would make, as a minimum, 200 of them. But, I believe, they 
were more numerous—perhaps from 250 to 300 in all. I must 
have missed a great many in this rough counting, and the 
number that went off looked very great. At any rate, counting 
those that were certainly on the amphitheatre at this time, the 
-whole flock cannot, I think, be much below 300. 

On getting to my post at the amphitheatre I found, as I 
expected, that the birds had gone down there, for they rose 
again in another great flock, and again went down. At this 
same time (6) a small flock of Peewits swept over the barren 
ground between here and the river, and went down upon it. 

At 6.35 a larger flock appeared, and began to sweep, circling 
around at a great height, uttering their cry. Noticed two of them 
chasing each other, apparently in sport. 

7 o’clock.—Numbers of Peewits sailing about high up, and 
mingled with them a flock of Starlings. Two Peewits often 
chase each other, and there is, sometimes, in a sudden dip down 
and curve up again, a trace of the aérial evolutions of the spring. 
They “faintly imitate” them, as Gibbon might say. Peewits and 
Starlings spread over the open space, searching about (apparently) 
for food, though it is difficult to think what, exactly, they get on 
such arid, barren ground. One Peewit will often rise from the 
ground and fly at another one near, who will then also rise, and the 
two will pursue each other a little, when, as if by mutual consent, 
both will desist, and go on feeding as before. The Starlings seem 
to enjoy the company of the Peewits. When these fly off, they 
go with them; and I have noted the flock of Starlings mingled and 
flying with the flock of Peewits (each almost, if not quite, as 


464 THE ZOQOLOGIST. 


numerous as the other), as also the single one flying with them. 
I do not think it is the other way. The Peewits, I believe, are 
quite indifferent to the Starlings. They may, however, have a 
complacent feeling in being thus followed, and, as it were, fussed 
about, which does not show itself in any action. The constant 
motion and activity of the Peewits offers a salient contrast to the 
stillness of the Great Plovers, who stand or sit almost motionless. 

At 7.30 cattle driven over, and all birds rise and fly away, the 
Plovers, no doubt, to their companions amongst the heather. 
After a time, Peewits back over the amphitheatre, and Starlings 
with them. 

At. 8.30 leave. 

September 27th.—Fine morning, clear sky, rather windy. 

Got to last place at 5.15. Dawn, at 5 o’clock, was only just 
breaking. 

5.85.—First note of Great Green Woodpecker in distance. 
Ditto Pheasants. 

5.40.—Note of Woodpecker nearer. 

6.—First Lark heard. 

6.10.—Just as sun breaks for first time through a cloud-bank, | 
seven Peewits rise from amphitheatre as if to salute him, and are. 
at once joined by two others who rise farther off. 

6.30.—First see Peewits circling high in air, as though 
enjoying the sunshine. 

A few more Peewits rise, and are at once followed by Starlings. 
I note carefully that the Peewits rise first. 

6.45.—Two Plovers fly up and come down on clear space in - 
front of me scarcely a dozen paces off, giving me a good view, . 
except that the sun is a little blinding, and, in any case, it seems 
hardly ever possible to get the defined outline of these birds, 
especially the beak, which one might think would stand out. 
sharply, but it is quite otherwise, and, generally, the outlines 
seems to blend with, or fade into, the air. 

These two birds made a few little inquisitive runs about, 
after which they stood a little, and one ruffled out its feathers 
very loosely, becoming quite a different bird—a sort of limp, 
round, feathery mop on two little stilts, something like Tenniel’s 
representation of the ‘‘ borogoves,” in ‘Through the Looking- 
Glass’ (‘‘ Mimsy,” therefore), if the legs had been longer. After 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 465 


a little, both the birds crouched and lay flat along the ground (a 


desert scene, one had the Sahara), one in the sun, another in 
slight shade. The latter, though in full view, became at once 


almost invisible, so that, when I took my eyes off him, I found 


it difficult to find him again. In a minute or two this one got 


up, and, making two or three short little runs forward, picked up 
something from the ground and swallowed it—what, I could not 
see. Both were now on their legs, and very shortly flew back 


_ to where they had come from. 


Peewits circling about in the sky singly, or, if they can be 
called ‘‘ together,” yet very widely spread out, and occupying a 


great area. 


Peewits not nearly so much en évidence this morning. 

One Peewit makes a little run forward up to another, and 
stands by, or.rather over him, with both wings lifted above back 
to fullest height—brandished, as it were. 

7.25.—Most of the Peewits rise and fly away (going in direction 
of the fens), but it is two or three minutes before the cattle 
appear, driven slowly towards the plateau, and then across it. 

As they get nearer a few other Peewits fly after the first. 
Finally all the birds arise, the rest of the Peewits following their 
companions, the Plovers flying over bracken to the moor. Of 
these latter I count thirty-seven. 

September 29th, 1899.—Leaving home, when crescent moon 
and stars were brightly shining (calm and still, sky clear, but 
slight mist over earth), walked to the bank, and, before taking 
up my station, purposely went all over just that part of the 
heath where the birds assemble (to the number of two hundred 
or three hundred). I did not put up any bird. At 4.10 took 
my place on the bracken-covered part of the bank, having now 
several times heard the ground-note of the Plovers. Probably 


on the arable land around; I had put up none whilst walking 


over the heath to the bank. 

4.15.—Trumpet of a Pheasant. 

4.30.—Several Pheasants trumpet. 

4.50.—Cry of Great Plover close, on ground, and first one 
flies over bank. I hear it only—the wings. It makes no cry. 
Now keep hearing ground-cry of Plovers close, as if they were 
walking to their place. 


466 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


4.55.—Hear another bird fly by. No cry. Think it wasa 
Plover. 

Then come 1, 3 (it is now 5 o’clock), 3, 2 (peculiar cry close 
by me. I think a Great Plover. If so it is a new note—at least, 
newly noted. Like cry of Moor-hen, but tone of Plover. Sudden, 
trumpety), 2, 3, 2. 

5.10.—1, 1. (Great noise of Partridges.) 

Very cold as the morning breaks; a hoar-frost on fern and 
heather. A mist hanging over the earth. 

5.25.—-There has been since 5.15, and still continues to be, 
a great noise of Partridges all about, and now great trumpeting 
of Pheasants. 

5.35.—No more Great Plovers up till now, and yet the 
morning flight home must have ceased. Only twenty birds, 
therefore, as against forty-nine on September 26th. Yet I now 
command all points, and find it difficult to imagine that any 
great number can have flown up without my seeing them, or at 
least hearing the wings. A search with the glasses, however, 
reveals twenty-eight birds amongst the heather—as many, or 
more, as I could count one morning when there were a great 
number concealed in it. As I heard the ground-note of the 
birds, first some way off, and then much nearer, probably in the 
place itself, it seems as if some of them had walked, or rather 
run, home. 

Wren hopping cheerfully about the frosty bracken. 

Pheasants making a great noise and seem very active, which 
has not been the case on previous mornings. May have relation 
to the frost and mist. | 

Have now walked to my other post by the plateau. 

A mist lies over everything, obscuring the sun. This seems 
to affect the Peewits (probably birds generally). No Peewits 
seen till 6.40. Then only two, flying, who soon go down. Later 
a small flock go past, but, from then till returning home about 8, 
I see no more. An entire absence of the joyous circling in the 
higher air which on the previous fine bright mornings I had seen. 

No Starlings (I think). 

Song of the Lark not heard till 7. 

Note of Great Green Woodpecker at 6.45, but had heard it, 
T think, a little before. 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 467 


September 30th.—About 3 p.m. walked to the bank and noted 


Plovers assembled in heather as usual. Could count thirty-three. 


In the evening, walking along road skirting moor, many flew 


over it and on over the fields and cultivated lands. These—and 
perhaps the immediate shores of the river, mud, &e.—are, I have 
no doubt, their feeding-grounds during the night. 


October 1st.—6.50 a.m.—Pigeon comes down on plateau and 
soon flies away. 

One Peewit flew by at 6.55 a.m. 

Some Great Plovers standing about on outer edge amongst 


the black (withered or burnt) heather, but no Peewits. 


7 a.m.—Hawk flies by, pursued, or accompanied for a little, 


_ by a Starling. 


First hear cooing of Wood-Pigeons. 
Left house at 5 a.m., but am too late for the Great Plovers, 


_ who have evidently all returned. I did not see one flying, but 
noted them in the heather through glasses as soon as light 
enough to use them. 


-7.5.—Flock of Peewits go by flying fast and high. 

6 p.m.—Great Plovers fly over road skirting moor, the greater 
number crossing river and keeping right on towards the higher 
lands on the other side. These are cultivated to some extent. 
Some few birds did not fly in this direction, but kept over the fields 
on this side of the river, and some must have come down in a 
ploughed field adjoining the road, as I heard their note there from 
behind the hedge. I was this evening nearer to the river when 
the birds began to fly, so probably met those that flew across it. 
Yesterday, when further from it, and nearer to the birds’ resort, 
those I saw seemed to fly over the fields, keeping parallel to and 
on this side of the river. Probably, therefore, they fly off in 
all directions, like the spokes of a wheel from the nave to the 
circumference, and return in the same way, only reversed— 
which might account for my seeing so few from any one point— 
for both at morning and evening there is the gloom to contend 
with. These birds seemed like wild spirits flying out on a 


stormy sky, and their wailing note was all in unison, They flew 


high and strongly, and made one wish to be one of them, and 


have done with human pettinesses. 
October 4th.—Going out at 4.30, when it was still dark, 


468 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


walked to the crests of low hills forming boundary of one side of 
river valley. I soon heard the ground-note of the Great Plovers, 
who appeared to be spread about over the ploughed and stubble 
fields in all directions, where, no doubt, they had been feeding 
during the night. They must have flown back soon after. my 
arrival. J heard the short wail, the latter part of the note 
divested of its preliminary trills and twitterings, which are 
uttered, as I think, only on the ground, and by. 5.30, when it 
was only just daylight, all must have gone, for there was 
complete silence. I had seen none flying, so must have missed 
them in the gloom. None flew later, which would have been 
quite contrary to their custom. 

October 5th.— Wishing to see the Plovers fly off for the night, 
I walked along the road skirting the heath a good deal further 
than I had done before, so that I was now on the other (not the 
river) side of their assembly ground. I sat down against a fir- 
tree. Did not note exact time, but heard their note, and they 
were soon in full cry. As dusk came on they began to fly, and 
in greater numbers than I have yet seen, not towards the river, 
as those I had hitherto seen had done, but towards me, and 
away from it (south, that is). I noticed, however, a tendency to 
curve gradually round, which may have brought them in time to 
the river. Forty-four flew away together (this was the greatest 
number); I could count them easily, as they were between me 
and that part of the sky which had the sunset glow init. The — 
flock of forty-four soon spread out into a long irregular line. 

By 6.15 p.m. one hundred and fifty-seven had flown (or, more 
properly, I had counted this number), after which the cry ceased. 
Though I did not look at my watch, the probable time when I 
arrived was 5.40 or 5.45. So that the birds had taken half an 
hour to forty minutes to get off. 

It would appear, therefore, that the majority of the birds fly 
not towards and across, but away from the river (south, more or 
less). I saw none fly in the former direction, but there I had 
not the light in the sky, and they would have been flying away 
from instead of towards me. ‘These reasons would be fully 
sufficient, and I have no doubt that as many flew that way as 
upon other evenings. 

October 6th.—'Lowards evening walked to the bracken-covered 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 469 


bank, where I concealed myself as on former occasions. The 
birds that would now pass by me would be flying towards the 
river (north), and it would be as difficult for me to see those 
flying in an opposite direction (as yesterday) as it would, 
yesterday, to have seen these. The birds were never, now, 
between me and the light of the sky. 

5.40.—First cry of the birds—faint and undecided. 

5.45.—Note again heard, and soon swelled into the full 
wailing chorus, repeated from one part of the heath to another. 

- §.50.—Birds began to pass me, flying towards the river. 
6.10.—Last note heard irom the assembly-place, though heard 
it twice later from other parts (at 6.13 and 6.15). 

I counted twenty-nine birds fly past me, but no doubt missed 
many in the gloom. The birds therefore got off this evening in 
about twenty minutes. 

October 8th.— Walked up the road again this evening, and sat 
_ down just as before, but a little higher up (more to the landward 
side of the birds, and farther from the river) at 5.45. 

On account perhaps of the fineness of the day—it was, I 
think, a little lighter than on previous evenings—there was no 
ery of the birds at this time, or at 5.50 (but, being a little farther 
off, I might not have heard a very slight cry). 

5.53.—Heard the first note (I think) slightly uttered. 

5.54.—First full decided cry. 

5.58.—Note becoming constant, rising and sinking (nothing, 
however, compared to the evening of Oct. 5th). 

6.3.—Two birds fly by me to the left, away from river (south). 
Hear note of others (or one other) flying on my right (riverside) 
hand, but quite near (north). 

Then came three (right hand, near, north), and at 6.8 three, 
and then one on left hand (south). 

Cry always continuing, but not very marked this evening. 
6.12.—Cry has ceased. Recommences. in few seconds, but 
- goon subsides, and shortly recommences again, and again sub- 
sides. 


6.15.—Silence. ; 
-6.16.—One bird flies by, left hand leaving river (north). I 


now left, and whilst walking down the road did not again hear 
the cry of the birds. 


es 


470 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Compare above with evening of Oct. 5th. There was not, I 
should think, one hundred yards distance between the two places 
where I sat, and I commanded just the same view. I had walked 
up and sat down equally quietly in both instances, and, as the 
birds are some way off the road, and accustomed to people 
walking along it at intervals during the day, it is not likely that 
I disturbed them, and caused them to go off in a flock of forty- 
four on the prior occasion. Something else may, however, have 
done so, and it certainly differed from their usual habits as 
observed by me. I have, however, before seen them go off in 
smaller flocks at evening from the amphitheatre. I do not know 
how to account for seeing so few birds to-night as compared with 
the 5th. Possibly a certain number of them may have migrated 
in the interval. 3 

Close on 6 p.m. walked up the road, and sat down at nearly 
same place as Oct. 8th. I heard the note of the Great Plovers as 
I came, but only a little, and after six it had quite ceased at the 
accustomed place amongst the heather, though once or twice it 
sounded again in the distance. Seven birds only flew by me after 
I sat down (i.e. I only noted seven). They were between me and 
the western sky, just as were those which flew by me to the num- 
ber of 157 on Oct. 5th. I now think that on that night that 
number—being the greater body—migrated. All or most of the 
flying birds uttered the characteristic wail in the air. 

October 10th.—Arrived at bank at 5.85, and sat down in a 
small pit on side of it commanding assembly-place. It was the 
very early dawn, some stars still visible, the very time when the 
birds ought, I think, to be in full flight back from their feeding- 
grounds. Heard the note once or twice as I walked (the ground- 
note, I think). 

5.40.—One bird flies from the heather, and goes over the 
bank in direction of amphitheatre and river. It flies silently. 

5.50.—Four or five birds fly over the moor, and come down in 
the heather. 

6.0.—See first Rabbit, and great trumpeting of Pheasants, 
which continues. There has been before a considerable noise of 
Partridges. 

It is now, of course, perfectly light, and long past the time 
for the Plovers’ flying back, which should have been when I 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 471 


arrived. No other bird has passed me. Beginning of a splen- 

didly fine autumn day. Cloudless sky, but slight mist and 
hoar-frost. No Rabbits, though their burrows are all about me. 

_ Searching the heather very carefully with glasses, can make out 

with certainty four Great Plovers, and, I think, a fifth. 

| 6.15.—A few Rabbits about now, but very little en évidence. 
Those that are, sitting quietly. 

6.35.—F lock of twenty-eight Peewits, flying high, 

‘6.45.—Wood-Pigeons flying high. I count twenty-three. 
Sun now just cresting the fir-trees, and beginning to make itself 
felt. Looking again, cannot make out the Great Plovers, or see 
anything but Rabbits. 

At 6.50 (an hour at least after the latest period at which the 
: birds would have flown back to assembly-ground) walked towards 
where I had noted the four or five, and soon put upnine. I then 
_ walked all about over the ground usually covered by them, but 
put no more up. Compare this with the large numbers on 
previous mornings, and on the evening of the 5th. 

Walking immediately afterwards to the amphitheatre, put up 

_ two flocks of eleven birds, making, with the nine at the heath, a 

total of thirty-one birds. This is assuming that these nine 

birds had not flown to the amphitheatre. They had started in 

the opposite direction, and I did not see any flying towards it as 

I walked. Twenty-two birds on the amphitheatre, though a very 

much less number than that which flew up from it on some morn- 

ings in September, is not much, if at all, less than what it has 

_ been on some other mornings when I watched there. I now feel 

assured, however, that the great body of the birds (to the number, 
probably, of from 170 to 250) have migrated. 

October 1lth.—5.45 p.m. Along road by moor. Counted 
fifteen Great Plovers fly off. Saw some near road dancing. Note 
ceased shortly after 6 p.m. Was never very loud or continuous, 

October 14th.—By moor for the Plovers. 

5.50 p.m.—A flock of twenty-one birds flew off over the moor, 
but they did not, I think, rise from heath, but from the amphi- 
theatre. A moment after they had flown by, six others rose 
from heath, and flew after them. 

At 5.55.—Another flock of thirty-four (as I counted them) 
flew by, and these again seemed to come from amphitheatre, 


472 _ THE ZOOLOGIST. 


This makes sixty-seven, and I still hear their cry over the 
moor. 

At 6 come three more, also from amphitheatre. . Still hear 
the note near on moor. It sounds like a single note. All these 
birds were flying south. 

At 6.2 leave. 

October 15th.—Between 5 and 5.30 p.m. walked to the amphi- 
theatre, and, searching it well with the glasses, could see no 
birds. Leaving at 5.30, and taking no precautions to conceal — 
myself, I did not put up any, and conclude there were none — 
there, or only some few at a distance. I then walked to the 
bank, where I arrived at about 5.35 or 5.40. Searching the 
heather, I could see no birds there; but now very dark for the 
glasses. 

Until a minute or two before 6 there was no cry, but it then 
began, though to a much less extent even than latterly. Halfa 
dozen birds or less would have been quite sufficient for what I 
heard. 

At 6.10 one bird flew by me over the bank (north, that is; I 
had seen none before) uttering its note, and from then I heard 
no more cries till 6.14, when I thought I heard one very faint one, 
but cannot be sure. From then till 6.20, when I left, I heard 
nothing more. (The last, I think, was a mistake.) I believe 
the notes for some time had been those of the solitary bird that 
flew by me. 

October 16th.— Walked up road by moor, and arrived at usual 
place at 5.50 p.m. 

In a moment or two three birds flew by, and shortly after a 
fourth. I heard the cry of a fifth bird flying farther off. 

At 5.57 heard the note of another, and again a moment 
afterwards. 

6.0.—A note from a bird, I think, flying. 

Saw or heard no others up to 6.10, when [I left. 

October 17th.—Same place as yesterday at 5.40 p.m., and at 
5.49 heard first notes of the Plovers. 

5.45.—One bird flies by silently. Hear others in heath, but 
there do not appear to be many. 

5.51.—Eleven birds fly off in silence. Still hear note in 
heather. : 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 473 


9.98.—Hight more, silently: Cry still from the heather. 
6.2.—One more in silence. Still hear the ground-note. 

Cry ceases shortly after 6.5, and at 6.10, when I leave. Have 
heard it no more. 

October 23rd.—No Great Plovers on amphitheatre in middle 
of afternoon, as I walked all over it without putting any up. 
Afterwards walked to bank, and could see none, with glasses, in 
_ the heather. Waiting by the road, however, from a little after 5, 
heard their note amongst the heather till about 5.20. There was 
i a mist, and I saw none fly. © 
: 

? 


October 28th. — 5.10 p.m. At the old place on the road 
by moor. 

I watched till 5.40, and during that time thought I heard once 
or twice the note of the Great Plover; but, if so, it was very low 
and subdued. Saw no bird fly off. 

October 29th. — 5.15 p.m. At same place. Quite dusk. 
Should have come a little earlier. Stayed till 5.30, by which 
time any bird there should have flown off. I saw none fly, and 
did not hear the note. Once or twice I had a suspicion that I 
did, faintly, and in the distance, but I do not think this was 
really the case. Neither, whilst walking up (when it was lighter) 
nor returning, did I see or hear a bird. 

October 30th.—At 10.40 a.m. walked to the bank, and from 
it searched with the glasses that portion of the heather which, 
three weeks ago, had been the daily resort of some hundred or 
so of the Great Plovers. I could not see a bird, and upon 
walking right down upon and all over it, I failed to put up a 
single one. 

Returning, I walked to the nearer part of the amphitheatre, 
and searched it with the glasses without discovering any of the 
birds. Being in a hurry, I had not time to walk over it, but 
had any been there I should certainly have put them up at this 
distance. At least, I have always done so before. 

It would appear, therefore, that all the Great Plovers that 
were here have now gone—migrated in all probability. 

4.55 p.m.—On road by moor, same place as yesterday. 

At 5.20 thought I heard note of the Great Plover. It was 
the tone, but only a single note, not repeated, and very subdued. 

At 5.30 left, having heard it no more. 

Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., October, 1900. 2K 


474 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Do not now think that what I heard was the Great Plover. 
Believe they are all gone. 

October 31st.—(Fine bright day. Sky almost cloudless.) 

5.10 p.m.—On road by moor again; same place. 

Saw no Great Plovers flying, neither had I seen any whilst 
walking up, nor did I when returning (though it would have 
been too dark to, unless they had come very near). 1, however, 
again heard several times distinctly that note which, on previous 
evenings lately, I had thought might proceed from these birds. 
Whether it does or not I cannot feel sure. It is merely a short 
single note, but in tone and character resembling, or at least 
recalling, the Great Plover’s. It may possibly be a less usually 
heard note of a Pheasant or Partridge. If not, then (unless to 
the Great Plover) I do not know to what bird to attribute it. 
But, as for nearly a week now I have seen none of these birds 
flying, nor put any up whilst walking over their former assembly- 
grounds, I think they must be all gone. 

November 1st.—At 5 p.m. I was at the bank, and walked all 
about that part of the moor near it where the Great Plovers had 
been wont to assemble. It was quite deserted. I did not puta 
bird up or hear the cry of one. Daylight was only just ceasing, 
and I should have seen any bird that I had disturbed. 


Short résumé of the birds’ habits during September and October, 
as observed in the foregoing. 


The Great Plovers have regular places of assembly, where 
they sit or stand during the day in more or less close proximity 
to one another. 

They prefer a place with some cover to one quite bare.* As 
evening falls they indulge in curious and excited motions, which 
may be called dances, or dance-antics. These are accompanied 
with their wild wailing note, which is of a peculiar character. It 
ends in a wail, but there is a prelude—often a long one—which 
begins with some high-pitched plaintive cries, and then passes 

* By far the greatest number of the birds passed the day amongst the 
heather near the bank. I have not specially noted it, but it was the skirts 
of the amphitheatre which had more or less cover (grass, withered heather, 
&c.) where they rested, and there were generally some in the bracken itself, 


where this was thin. They spread over the open space as evening came on, 
or earlier if moths or other insects attracted them. 


HABITS OF THE GREAT PLOVER. 475 


into wild, wailing trills and twitterings that seem part of the 
deepening gloom and sad sky; for Nature’s own sadness seems 
to speak in the voice of these birds. These melancholy sounds 
swell and subside and swell again as they are caught up and 
repeated in different places, from one bird to another, and often 
swell into a full chorus of several together. This note in its 
entirety is only uttered by the bird whilst on the ground. That 
uttered during flight is a simple wail like the ending of the 
above. It is difficult to judge of the whereabouts of the birds 
by their cry, and they often seem to be much nearer than they 
really are. 

The dance-antics are varied with little flights over the ground, 
if these may not rather be said to be a part of them. In one of 
_ these the bird takes its departure, thus dancing off, as it were. 

Rain would seem, sometimes at least, to have an exhilarating 
effect, causing the bird to come out from its cover into it,* and 
begin the dance-antics earlier than it would otherwise have done. 

When thus leaving for the night, they rarely or never fly 
silently, but utter the simple, short wail (short, that is, by 
comparison). This is more particularly as they leave the 
assembly-place, or are still near it. 

During the night they feed over the general surface of the 
country, preferring, probably, the “‘ fat,” or cultivated lands. 

In the very early dawn they fly back to their assembly- 
grounds, and this morning-flight is mostly in silence. Only 
rarely is a wail uttered, but the ground-note is now sometimes 
heard, though it is much less full and striking than in the 
evening. The birds may very likely feed towards home, and 
fly to it when at a certain distance. Some possibly may arrive 
on foot.t 

Besides these two notes (the ground one and that of flight) 
the Great Plover has a few others, the most pronounced of which 


* The birds when thus seen by me stretched (once or twice, I think) the 
wing up for the under part to get the rain, as does a Pigeon. I forgot to 
note this down, and also that on another occasion rain seemed to have no 
effect on them. But I was not there when it first came on, and could stay 
. only a short time. 

+ My having heard the ground-note at early dawn, when the birds were 
flying back, very near to (as far as I could judge), but not quite at, the place 
of assembly, suggests this. 

2K2 


476 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


(‘‘ tir-whi-whi-whi-whi-whi”’) may express distress, or, at least, 
perturbation. | 

The Great Plover pursues and catches moths certainly, and 
other insects probably, whilst they are flying, with great eagerness 
and dexterity, sometimes making jumps into the air after them, 
in doing which it aids itself, if necessary, with its wings. Possibly 
it sometimes flies after a moth, &c., that rises beyond its reach. 

An abundance of insects about produces, in these birds, more 
diurnal activity than would otherwise be the case. 

If the one word is to exclude the sense of the other, then the 
Great Plover cannot strictly be called either diurnal or nocturnal. 
It would seem to be more the latter than the former, but di- 
nocturnal would be a more fitting word (did it exist). 

Migration begins early in October, but it is not till between 
the middle and end of the month that all the birds are gone. 

The whole flock does not depart together, but in two or more 
bodies (the larger first), with an interval of several days between 
them. But stragglers (or rather laggards) are left, and these 
may go singly, or in small groups. 

The Great Plover is an eminently social bird.* 


* This does not apply merely to their congregating in the autumn. They 
show, generally, a liking for each other’s society. ‘The breeding season 
modifies this to some extent, but they begin to come together again as soon 
as it is over. 


Care ) 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


MAMMALIA. 

Wild Cat.—Will any one of the contributors to ‘The Zoologist ’ refer 
me to the best picture from life of the Wild Cat—say, in the next number 
of ‘The Zoologist ’?—and I will be much obliged.—J. A. Harvin-Brown 
(Dunipace, Larbert, Stirlingshire). 


Oared Shrew in Suffolk.—On Sept. 5th I met with a Water Shrew 
(Sores fodiens), of the variety formerly known as the Oared Shrew (S. remifer) 
—cf. Bell—and considered specifically distinct from the ordinary white-bellied 
form. It was a pregnant female, and so large that before picking it up I 
took it for a half-grown Mole. It was found by a Dog among long grass in 
a meadow in thig parish, some five or six yards from the nearest ditch. 
Hoping to have more time the following day to examine it thoroughly, I 
placed it for the night in a closely-wired Mouse-cage, with some water, a 
bed of dry grass, and some earth containing a plentiful supply of earthworms, 
one of which it at once seized and devoured. Next morning, however, the 
Shrew was nowhere to be found. It had managed iu some unaccountable 
manner to escape from its cage. It was certainly a good deal larger than 
an average-sized House-Mouse (Mus musculus). The snout was rather broad 
and flattened, and there were no white hairs on the ears. Its climbing 
powers were considerable, for it not only ascended easily the upright wires 
of its cage, but even made its way along the top, clinging back downwards 
to the wires. The fact of its being with young at this season seems to 
denote that more than one litter is produced during the year. Many years 
ago, on the bank of a pond in this parish, I saw, but was unable to catch, 
one of these animals, which I believe to have been still larger. — G. T. 
Rope (Blaxhall, Suffolk). 


Hybrid Dog and Fox.—In the new Museum at Worcester, standing 
upon a shelf in the recess set apart for local mammals, there is a stuffed 
animal, labelled Wolf, which I suspect is a hybrid between a Dog and a 
Fox. Pasted up alongside is an old and, I think, dateless newspaper cut- 
ting, containing a sensational account of the behaviour of the ‘ monster” 
during the time just preceding its destruction. ‘The paragraph was too long 
to copy in full during the time at my disposal, but to the best of my recol- 
lection the pith of it is as follows: The animal entered a cottage in a 
village in Worcestershire, and quietly Jaid down under a table, Roused 


hb 


478 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


from its rest by the crying of a child, it was making for the sound with the 
purpose of devouring its originator, when a Cat, with less discretion than 
is usually displayed by this feline, flew at the intruder, but in the tussle 
that ensued was torn limb from limb, and afterwards devoured piecemeal 


on the spot. The subsequent proceedings I forget, but the “ Wolf” appa- — 


rently continued to hang about the cottage, till some passing labourers, 


apprised of its doings and probable intentions, attacked and killed it. The — 
alleged ferocity and unmistakable, albeit superficial, Wolf-like aspect of the 


animal, coupled, may be, with the circumstance that it was not recognized — 


as the property of any of the farmers or Dog-owners of the neighbourhood, 


seem to have been the considerations which led the good people into whose ~ 


hands the beast fell to settle offhand that it must be a ‘“‘ Wolf escaped from ~ 


a menagerie,” the expansion of the predicate being only justified as a 
corollary of the first part. Judging from the size of the teeth, the creature 
was adult. It is rather larger than a Fox, and has a bushy tail and erect 
ears. The legs and the head, so far as could be seen, except for a blackish 
patch in front of the ear, are a rich fawn-colour; the back is black, mottled 


with dark grey, the tail being much the same shade on the back, and with- 


out a white tip. Apart from its slightly superior size, it differs strikingly 


from a Fox in having the ears and feet fawn instead of blackish, and in the 


absence of white from the lips and throat. Of Wild Dogs, it is perhaps 


the Black-backed Jackal that it most calls to mind, although much stouter — | 


in build and smaller in the ears than that elegant species. It also 
resembles a small cock-eared colley, and might pass muster as such amongst 
a crowd of mongrels. A suspiciously “foxy” look about the beast, how- 
ever, inclines me to the belief that it is the progeny of a Fox, and probably 
some country Sheep-dog. It would be interesting to learn if there are any 
authenticated cases of hybridism between the two species, and, if so, what 


were the characters of the “ hybrids.”—R. I. Pocock (Nat. Hist. Museum, | | 


South Kensington). 


[In ‘The Zoologist’ for last year (p. 240) an abstract was given of a 


communication by the Rev. J. Conway Walter, which appeared in the 
‘Naturalist ’ for April of that year, on ‘ Fox and Dog Hybrids near Horn- 
castle.”’—Ep.| 

AVES. 

The Bearded Tit: a Correction corrected. — Mr. Ridsdale’s note 
upon this subject (ante, p. 422) is entertaining, but, if he wishes us to 
believe that Gesner really figured the Bearded Tit, I am afraid he will 
require to produce some further corroborative evidence. elon figures the 
Great, Blue, and Long-tailed Tits, and refers to the Marsh-Tit, but not to 
any other that I can discover. Gesner, who comes next in chronological 
order, figures the Coal, Crested, and Marsh-Tits, as well as those figured by 


PE i ee ae ae 


NOTES AND QUERIES, 479 


Belon ; but his seventh figure does not represent the Bearded Tit, as Mr. 
Ridsdale gives us to suppose. It represents one of two things—either his 
Parus sylvaticus, which was possibly a Fire-crest (from his description of the 
red colour of its crown, and its other tints), or else the bird with a black 
head reported to him from France as the Mounier. Aldrovandus refers to 


_ the Penduline Tit, if I understand him rightly ; but I cannot make out that 


even Aldrovandus, with all his knowledge of European birds, had ever come 
across the Bearded Tit. For my part, I see no reason to doubt the correct- 
ness of Mr. Gurney’s original statement; nor will anyone, I believe, who 
studies the text of Belon, Gesner, and Aldrovandus with sufficient care. — 
H. A. Macpuerson (The Rectory, Pitlochry, Perthshire). 

[Mr. Ridsdale’s correction (?) was submitted to Mr. Gurney before publi- 
cation for any comment he might care to make, but he naturally assumed 
that his critic must be correct.— Ep. ] 


Movements of Starlings.—As an appendix to my paper on this subject 
(ante, p. 181), I should like to add that since writing it I have been told of 
another “roost” at Petton Park, between Shrewsbury and Wem. The 
roost consists of large clumps of laurels, rhododendrons, and other evergreen 
shrubs. The gardener, Mr. Tatton, states that the Starlings resort there 
in enormous numbers from December to March! This is most interesting, 
as at that period the other roosts in the county are nearly deserted. It 
would appear that the Petton roost is the last resort of the Starlings, 
because in these evergreens they find warmth and shelter when the trees in 
the other roosts are bare. The roost described by Mr. Corbin (Zool. 1879, 
p. 215) is of a similar character. He speaks of it as being still used at the 
end of March. During the present season I have not found a single case 
of the Starling rearing two broods.—H. H. Forrest (Shrewsbury). 


Some Notes on the Swift (Cypselus apus)—May 5th. First Swift 
appeared. 6th. Four together on the wing this evening. 7th. The full 
complement of our Swifts for this village seem to be already with us. I 
believe there is generally little delay after the appearance of the first 
arrivals before the complete number are with us. 15th. With the cold east 
winds we had about this date Swifts seemed entirely absent upon the wing, 
remaining in their nesting-holes and other accommodation, evidently pre- 
ferring warmth with starvation to facing the uninviting elements. 31st. 
Windy ; very few Swifts upon the wing. 7 p.m., a Swift in the previous 
year’s nesting-hole on the roof of my house. No eggs at present. 

June 8th.—Having been from home since previous note, I have been 
unable to visit the nest before to-night at 9 p.m., when I found the Swift 
sitting on three eggs,* little doubt the laying of one female, as I have never 


* The eggs are two in number.—Howard Saunders, ‘ Manual of British 


Birds,’ 


480 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


seen more than the one pair enter the nest. Last year the first egg 
was laid on June 5th. 12th. As the Swifts were ceasing their noisy 
gatherings, and after the males had evidently accompanied the females 
in many instances to their nests, they returned again to the gathering, 


and in their further manceuvrings gradually reached a good altitude; E 


here they seemed to eventually cease their screamings, and the flock to 


limit themselves more and more to a restricted area, until eventually — 


they merely floated in company upon the wing—not in the so-called 
“night-flight,” but in their “aerial sleep.” Unfortunately, owing to 
the now fast decreasing light, these actions, even with ea good glass, 
could not be studied for any length of time. 19th, 7.30 p.m. Six or more 
Swifts were circling around my house, and constantly flying up to the 
entrance of the nesting-hole, where the one was sitting, inviting, as it were, 
the sitting bird to join in their social gathering (if such a noisy concourse 
can be so termed) which was about tocommence. 20th. The Swifts, whilst 
incubating, and, in fact, at all times whilst within the nest, seem absurdly 
tame, allowing me to handle them daily, and feel beneath to take particulars 
of the eggs under incubation, and not in any single instance leaving the 
nest, although the exit was always open. Occasionally I would be greeted 
by a flapping of wings, or the rubbing of the beak against my fingers in 
their attempt to peck me. 28rd. Eggs still in nest. 24th, 8.30 a.m. 
Two of the eggs hatched ; one remains. Incubation lasts at least sixteen 
days. 26th, 6.30 a.m.; cold and windy. Both Swifts on nest, now con- 
taining three young. 

July 4th, 9.5 p.m. Unless the nights are calm and warm, I do not think 
the Swifts ever sleep upon the wing. To-night was a perfect time for 
them, and they gave me a splendid opportunity of seeing them ascend. 
Several descended before the others rose to any considerable heigit ; alto- 
gether about twelve remained in the company. One of the old birds 
remained with the two young (the third young one having died) throughout 
the night. 5th. The female (presumed in every instance) spends the 
greater part of the day with her young, and is now far more pugnacious 
than when with eggs. The feeding of the young does not take place con- 
tinuously throughout, or at any particular part of the day; the female will 
leave the nest for some considerable time (even an hour or more), and 
returns with evidently sufficient food to satisfy the young for several hours 
at least. From present observation I do not think the male takes any share 
in providing forthe young. 8th, 12tolp.m. Female remains with young ; 
3 to 80, no Swift approaches the nest; 4.30 to 5.30, female absent from 
young, and did not return; 6.30, female on nest, and remained there all 
the evening. The male slept in company with the female. The one 
which J think was the female objected, as usual, to my intrusion, but the 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 481 


male allowed me to remove him from the nest without protest whilst 
' I satisfied myself of the two being there. In the majority of instances the 
_ female alone remains with young. When putting one’s hand into the nest 
~ for investigation (which is always necessary owing to the total absence of 
| light whence these cbservations are taken) the young open their mouths to 
' be fed sufficiently wide to enable me to put my finger fully into their 
_ throats. 15th. Young are becoming very pugnacious, flapping at and 
’ pecking one’s hand. 

August 4th, 7 a.m.—Very windy. Both old and two young in nest. 
10th. Young still in nest. 11th. The young left the nest previous to mid- 
| day, and evidently remained on the wing throughout the remaining portion 
' of the day. Time of young remaining within the nest: six weeks, six days. 
12th. One Swift only at roost in nest. 19th. Swifts noticed in this locality 
_ for the last time, seemingly in their usual number. 23rd. One Swift seen 
_ in adjoining parish. 24th. Three together in another district two miles 
distant.—J. SrkeLe-Ewuiottr (Clent, Worcestershire). 


Cuckoo breeding in London District.—In connection with the note 
on this subject (ante, pp. 488-9), it may be of interest to record that on 
_ June 6th, 1896, I found a Whitethroat’s nest containing four eggs, one of 
_ which was a Cuckoo’s. This was in a hedge within a few yards of a public 
footpath, and close to Hampstead Heath. On May 23rd in the following 
' year (1897), I found a Hedge-Sparrow’s nest in the same locality with one 
_ egg of that bird and a Cuckoo’s. The latter was not blue, and not unlike 
eggs of the Sedge-Warbler in colour. Both these Cuckoos’ eggs were quite 
- unlike each other. I believe that in the collection of Cuckoos’ eggs, with 
the nests and eggs of the foster-parents, in the British Museum, those that 
are laid in Hedge-Sparrows’ nests are not blue. In each of the above 
records the foster-parent was observed on the nest.—Basin W. Martin 
(Elm Lodge, Hampstead). 


Observations on the Cuckoo in Aberdeen.—There was a continuation 
of the singing of this bird (Cuculus canorus) up to July 15th. As near as 
could be estimated there were about ten young ones seen about my farm; 
certainly an increase as regards former years. ‘They exhibited a variety of 
colours, from blue to rufous. A young one, which was rufous, with a large 
white spot on the crown of the head, was handled on June 17th. This one 
had either removed from the nest to be sheltered from the rain, or had 
flown from the nest in sunshine, and then had become unable to fly through 
the heavy rains accompanying a thunderstorm on the date mentioned. Its 
feathers seemed quite sufficiently grown for flying, but these birds are 
evidently much influenced by wet, especially if the weather becomes cold at 
the same time. I noticed, during cold days on and about Aug. 4th, that 
some young ones chirped on continually ; in fact, their cries were pitiable. 


482 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Of course these were still attended to by the foster-birds, but whether the 
crying was for food or on account of the cold, I cannot say. Perhaps both. 
It might be surmised that the cold would awaken the appetite, provided it 
did not interfere with the health of the bird ; and it is also probable that 
certain forms of insects were not so easily available in cold as in warm 
weather. There was a young one flying about on Aug. 10th, with a foster- 
bird in attendance; this being the latest date on which I saw them. The 
whole of the foster-birds were Mountain Linnets (Linota flavirostris).— 
Wm. Witson (Alford, N.B.). 


The Little Owl in Flintshire ?—In collecting materials for a fauna of 
North Wales, I have lately had occasion to look into old records as far back 
as the beginning of the century. One of the problems presented for solution 
was this—Has the Little Owl (Carine noctua) ever been obtained in North 
Wales? Yarrell and Morris mention it as having occurred in Flintshire, 
but give no particulars. Montagu, writing of it under the title of the 
Sparrow-Owl (Noctua passerina, Savigny), notices that the descriptions of 
plumage given by various authors show many discrepancies. He did not, 
apparently, perceive that three species had been confounded together under 
the title of Little Owl. These we now know as Carine noctua and Nyctala 
tengmalmi ; the third—the form called Strix passerina by Linnzeus—has 
never occurred in Britain. Traced to its source, the statement that Carine 
noctua has occurred in Flintshire appears to rest on the testimony of Pen- 
nant. Let us see what he says. In his ‘Tour in Wales,’ speaking of the 
detached hundred of Maelor in Flintshire, he states that that rare British 
species, the Little Owl, had been taken in some woods near Overton. In 
his ‘ British Zoology,’ 1812, p. 270, he states, in general terms, the Little 
Owl (Strta passerina) ‘is sometimes found in Yorkshire, Flintshire, and 
also near London.” The allusion to Flintshire probably refers to the 
Overton bira. Later writers have copied this statement without question. 
I think, however, that the description given by Pennant indicates that the 
bird was Nyctala tengmalmi, not the species now known as the Little Owl 
(Carine noctua). The editor of the fourth edition of ‘Yarrell’ was also of 
this opinion, for on p. 155 he writes :—‘ The ‘ Little Owl’ figured in the 
folio edition of Pennant’s ‘ British Zoology’ was probably of this species ” 
[N. tengmalmi]. Yet on p. 179 he still speaks of the Little Owl as having 
occurred in Flintshire. If it could be proved that Pennant’s Overton Owl 
was Carine noctua, the much-debated question as to the admission of the 
Little Owl to the British list might be considered settled; at that period 
it is unlikely that it could have been an escaped or imported bird. Now, 
to sum up the evidence. So far as we know only one Little Owl has been 
obtained in North Wales. (Dr. Dobie records another at Gresford, but 
suggests a doubt as to species.) That one was apparently Nyctala teng- 


. 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 4838 


malmi, and was taken at Overton, Flintshire. If so, Carine noctua has not 
occurred in Flintshire, despite the oft-repeated statement that it has.—H. 
HK. Forrest (Shrewsbury). 


\ 


Red-crested Pochard in Yorkshire.—A fine specimen of the Red- 
crested Pochard (Fuliqula rufina) was shot on a marsh near Redcar on 
Jan. 20th, 1900, and is now in my possession. It is, I believe, the first 
recorded example of this rare Duck for Yorkshire—T. H. Newson (The 
Cliffe, Redcar). 


Stone Curlew in Cleveland in Winter.—An example of the Stone 
Curlew (Gidicnemus scolopax) was brought to me on Dec. 16th, 1899, by a 
man who had caught it alive during a snowstorm on the sand-hills east of 
Redcar. The occurrence of this species in Cleveland is at any time 
unusual, but its presence here in mid-winter is so exceptional as to be 
worthy of record.—T. H. Nruson (The Cliffe, Redcar). 


Curlew at Sea.—It is, I think, a rare occurrence for Numenius arquata 
to be seen any distance out at sea. On the last homeward voyage of the 
Union Castle Liner ‘ Norman,’ in August, about eighteen hours after leaving 
Madeira, I observed a Curlew flying over the water, and making for the 
ship, evidently with the intention of seeking refuge thereon. Several times 
did this usually cunning bird fly up to within gunshot, but sheered off 
again each time, and ultimately disappeared altogether, frightened no doubt 
by the weird aspect of the ship—her huge white side, her red funnels from 
which streamed black smoke, her decks alive with passengers, and forging 
her way through the water at sixteen knots an hour. The bearings of the 
‘Norman’ at the time were 40° N. 12° 1’ W., or, approximately, fifty miles 
from land.—Ricaarp CrawsHay (109, Jermyn Street, S.W.). 

[It is probable that the ship did not greatly frighten the bird. We have 
already recorded capturing a Storm-Petrel (Procellaria pelagica) on board 
this very vessel, the ‘ Norman,’ near the Cape Verde Islands (Zool. 1899, 
p. 557). On another vessel of the same line, the ‘ Norham Castle,’ we found 
the ship to be a regular avian rendezvous (ef. ibid. 1898, p. 509).— Eb. ] 


PISCHES. 


Sun-fish in the Yarmouth Roads.—A short Sun-fish (Orthagoriscus 
mola), about two feet long, was floundering about in the Roads on Sept. 5th, 
and was secured by some fishermen, who had little difficulty in effecting the 
capture. A friend purchased it for me, but, owing to the non-delivery of a 
post-card, I missed obtaining it before going wrong, and being thrown away 
among the offal.—A. Parrrrson (Ibis House, Great Yarmouth). 


484 THE Z00LOGIST. 


MOLLUSCA. 


Molluscs eaten by Wood-Pigeons.—On Sept. 5th, whilst shooting on 
the confines of the Bog of Allen, Co. Kildare, I killed a Wood-Pigeon, in 
whose crop I found thirty-nine Snails, which appeared to me to be Water- — 
Snails. An instance of this sort has never come under my notice. The bird 
was in first-rate condition, and corn in the neighbourhood at this time of year 
is easily obtainable. There was nothing else in the crop save two hawthorn- 
berries and one oat. I send you by this post some of the Snails, and shall 
be glad to hear whether this is an unusual occurrence. —H. MARMADUKE 
LanepALE (Compton Vicarage, Petersfield, Hants). 

[The specimens forwarded by Mr. Marmaduke Langdale represent the 
«© Amber Snail” (Swcctnea putris),an amphibious species, seldom seen in the 
water except in the spring, when on its way from winter quarters in the mud. 
It is probable that its attack by Pigeons is not unusual. One of my sons 
keeps a quantity of pond-fish in a garden-tank, and, on my advice, intro- 
duced as scavengers a number of Limnea stagnalis. These molluscs have 
steadily disappeared, while his Fantail-Pigeons seem to have a great 
attraction for the sides of the tank. Mr. Langdale’s communication per- 
haps offers a suggestion as to what hitherto seemed a mysterious dis- 
appearance. Mr. Collins Baker, who has recently written on the Mollusca 
of the Chicago Area, states that Passerine birds are fond of Pupa, Vertigo, 
and small Limaces (cf. Chic. Ac. Nat. Sci—Nat. Hist. Surv. Bull. ii. 
p. 33).—Eb.] 

CRUSTACEA. 


Meristic Variation in the Edible Crab.—I forward a sketch and 
examples of two different malformed claws of Cancer pagurus. I have 
obtained several Crabs with double and treble pointed large pincer-claws | 
(cf. Zool. 1897, p. 340, and 1898, p. 220), but this is the first time I have ~ | 
met with malformation in the smaller claws. In one the two end claws are | 
fused into one, in the other example they can be worked separately.—A. 
PatTERSON (Ibis House, Great Yarmouth). 


MYRIOPODA. 


Marine Centipede in Somerset.—There are two species of marine, or, 
rather, littoral Centipedes found in England—Geophilus submarinus and 
Linotenia maritima. So far as I know, Polperro, on the coast of Cornwall, 
is the only spot in England where G. submarinus has been collected; L. 
maritima, on the contrary, has been found at several localities, and is evi- 
dently widely distributed. In the British Museum there are examples 
from Bexhill (H. Scherren) and Polperro (Mr. Laughrin), in England; and 
from Portmarnock, Co. Dublin (G. H. Carpenter), and the coast of Galway 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 485 


(D’Arcy Thomson), in Ireland. The species has also been recorded from 
the south coast of Devonshire by the late Mr. Parfitt. Hence there is 
nothing surprising in my recent discovery of it at Portishead, on the coast 
of Somersetshire, some three or four miles to the south of Avonmouth, at a 
spot a few hundred yards to the north of the Nove lighthouse, where a small 
shingle beach forms a convenient bathing-place. I had hitherto looked 
upon this Centipede as a rarity to be picked up only by ones or twos. 
Great therefore was my astonishment when, turning over the line of seaweed 
marking the high spring-tide, to find specimens of all sizes swarming 
amongst the slimy decaying fronds, and wriggling away into darkness in 
company with hosts of scuttling Woodlice and hopping Sand-Shrimps ; 
while here and there was a cluster of them feeding upon the remains of one 
of these crustaceans. I afterwards looked for this Centipede under the weed 
on the beach beneath Aust cliff, in Gloucestershire, some miles to the north 
of Avonmouth, but without success.—R. I. Pocock (Nat. Hist. Museum, 
South Kensington). 


os 


Vertebrate Fauna of North Wales.—I am preparing materials for a 
fauna of this district, which has hitherto been sadly neglected. Excellent 
local lists of birds have been published by Prof. Salter, Mr. F. C. Raw- 
lings, and Dr. Dobie, dealing respectively with the districts of Aberystwith, 
Barmouth, and the counties of Flint and Denbigh. The Report of the 
“ Parliamentary Commission on Land in Wales” contains notes on birds 
and mammals by my friend Mr. Ruddy, and others. Eyton’s list, published 
in 1838, is the only one which deals with the whole district, and with all 
the vertebrates. It is now quite out of date, and of little practical use. 
Valuable notes have appeared in ‘The Zoologist’ from time to time, 
especially during the last ten years. Others, in the Reports of the Marine 
Biological Committee, Liverpool, and in various books, periodicals, &c. 
The labour of preparing the description of a fauna of such a wide district is 
evidently beyond the powers of any one man. I therefore venture to 
appeal to all readers of ‘ The Zoologist’ to assist in this much-needed work 
by contributing notes of their own observations. Many practical naturalists 
in North Wales have already promised me their valued aid ; but, in order 
to arrive at a just idea of the distribution of the common species, it is 
necessary to collect information from every district. I shall be glad to 
hear from anyone who is willing to fill up lists, especially as regards 
_ Anglesea and Carnarvon. Very little is known about the Fishes and 
Cetaceans of North Wales ; information about these will be most welcome. 
—H. HE. Forrest (Shrewsbury Museum). 


486 | THE ZOOLOGIST. 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


The Birds of Ireland. By Ricuarp J. UssHeR and RoBERT 
WarREN. Gurney & Jackson. 


Tus is a book to be welcomed by ornithologists; its authors 
are naturalists of repute; it has received assistance from most 
Irish ornithologists; Mr. R. M. Barrington has supplied much 
unpublished information collected from light-keepers; the records 
reproduced have been well sifted, and the whole book exhibits a 
scientific method that may serve for imitation by some writers of 
county faunas. Thompson’s ‘Natural History of Ireland,’ which 
still contained the greatest treatise on Irish ornithology, was 
published some fifty years ago, and the present book will naturally 
now succeed if for present-day information. 

Of birds that have ceased to be residents are the Crane, the 
Great Auk, and the Capercailzie; on the other hand, the Magpie, 
first reported in Ireland towards the end of the seventeenth 
century, has spread rapidly, ‘‘ and is now to be seen everywhere, 
except on the barest moorlands.” The Starling has increased 
as a breeding species, and the steady extension of this bird’s 
‘summer range in Ireland is of a piece with what has taken 
place in Scotland”; Woodcocks have greatly increased in the 
Irish woodlands during the summer; and the Mistle-Thrush, of 
which the first Irish example known to Thompson was shot in 
1808, is now “resident, common, and widely distributed.” The 
Tufted Duck is also another bird which, during the last twenty 
years, has extended its breeding range, while a similar remark 
applies to the Stock-Dove, so that at least the feathered population 
of Ireland is not diminishing. 

It is cheerful for English naturalists of our south coast to 
read that in Ireland no bird is more characteristic of the cliff- 
scenery than the Chough, and ‘‘in no country probably does it 
flourish in its natural strongholds more undisturbed.” Although 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 487 


the Chough and the Jackdaw are reported by Mr. Ussher as not 
apparently molesting one another, “still, the increase of the 
Jackdaw has been observed in many places to coincide with the 
diminution of the red-billed bird.” The Crested Lark has been 
once obtained in Ireland, and it is interesting to read that it was 
shot by the well-known war correspondent, Sir W. H. Russell, 
then a boy of fifteen, who under the letters “ W. R.” communicated 
the fact to the ‘Dublin Penny Journal’ in 1836. It will probably 
_ not be known to all that the Stone-Curlew is in Ireland a “ rare 
_ casual visitor, chiefly in winter, but never in summer,” and that 
it has only been obtained in ten cases. Many interesting facts 
_ and suggestions are given respecting the Guillemot. Mr. Ussher 
remarks that as incubation proceeds the eggs become so completely 
covered with filth that he has seen many cemented thereby to 
_ the rock, which may account for the exaggerated statement that 
the bird has the power of gluing them to the rock to keep them 
from falling off. He also suggests that the beautiful varieties of 
_ colouring in the eggs ‘“‘must help each bird to distinguish her 
_ eggs from others lying near, until they become all stained and 
- soiled.” 
We could, but must not, extract other notes from this history 
_of Irish birds, which is, and will long remain, the standard work 
- on the subject. Itis a story well told, and a treatise well written, 
embellished with the reproduction of some well-selected photo- 
graphs, and with a coloured plate exhibiting variations in the 
tints and markings of the eggs of the Peregrine Falcon. 


Fancy Waterfowl. By Frank Finn, F.Z.S. Published by 
‘The Feathered World.’ 


THE purpose and scope of this publication is distinctly 
enunciated by the author. It is ‘“‘to give such description and 
details as may enable anyone who becomes interested in these 
beautiful birds to recognise such species as he will see in 
collections on ornamental waters, like that of St. James’s Park, 
or find on sale with the dealers, and to treat them successfully if 
he decides to take up the Fancy on his own account.” 


488 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


It is thus addressed more to the aviculturist than to the strict 
ornithologist, though the division between these two students is 
very difficult to maintain. A live bird must necessarily afford 
more information than a preserved skin; on the other hand, the 
opportunities of acquiring the first are infinitesimal compared with 
the vast available material of the second. Consequently we must 
look to the cabinet ornithologist for our general knowledge, and | 
to the field naturalist and the aviculturist for bionomical infor- 
mation. Mr. Finn has provided an excellent help to those who 
wish to keep waterfowl—we must plead guilty to a strong dislike 
of the word “ Fancy”; and his knowledge of zoology and position 
in the Indian Museum entitle him to write as one in authority, 
and not as the “ Fanciers.” 


Church Stretton: Geology, by E. S. Coppoztp; Macro-Lepi- 
doptera, by F. B. Newnuam; Molluscs, by R. A. Buppicom. 
Edited py C. W. Campsett-Hystor. Shrewsbury: L. 
Wilding, printer. . 

Tuis is the first instalment of a series of monographs relating 
to Church Stretton, of which those on Botany, Archeology, 

Climatology, and Ornithology are in preparation, and will appear | 

subsequently. | 

This neighbourhood was described by J. G. Jeffreys as ‘the | 
picturesque locality of Stretton in Shropshire”; and Mr. Newn- | 
ham refers to it as ‘‘a district of hill and dale, of moorland, wood, 
and stream.’’ Consequently it is a spot worthy of a local natural | 
historian, and when a body of naturalists unite to describe its 
fauna, flora, geology, and other natural features, and do so in an 
exhaustive manner, we recognize a very useful addition to British 
natural history. 


mak ZAOQLOGIST 


No. 71 3.—November, 1900. 


THE BIRDS or LLEYN, WEST CARNARVONSHIRE. 
By OV: Apia, B.L.8. 


Tue western part of the promontory of Carnarvonshire known 
as Lleyn is almost devoid of the mountainous features so charac- 
teristic of the eastern and northern parts of the county. After 
leaving the group of mountains lying south of Clynnog, and the 
triple-headed Yr Eifl, or ‘‘ The Rivals” (the highest point of 
- which rises no higher than 1849 ft.), and going westward, we 
see no more than occasional isolated semi-conical mountains 
(with supplementary hills) rising from the undulating plain. Of 
these Carn Bodfean and Carn Fadryn (1221 ft.) are the most 
remarkable. But the Rhiw hills, at the north-west end of the 
sweep of Hell’s Mouth, cutting off the extreme west end of the 
promontory, and many other lesser ridges, break up the country ; 
while the coast headlands grow bolder as we go westward, and 
reach their greatest height in Mynydd Annelog, a little to the 
north of the land’s-end of North Wales, and Graig ddu and 
Penarfynydd, which run out from the Rhiw hills. The rushing 
mountain torrent is consequently wanting, and the little rivers, 
although quick in places, and clear as to their waters, flow often 
quite sluggishly through reeds and flags and lush green marshes, 
haunted by Snipes and Moor-hens and numerous broods of Wild 
Ducks, rather than by the Dipper. I cannot say that the Dipper 
is not found in the western parts of Lleyn; but, though I looked 

Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., November, 1900. 21 


490 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


casually on many bits of stream, I did not see one during the 
time (June 15th to July 8rd, 1899) I spent in the district. Nor 
did I meet with more than one pair of Grey Wagtails (another 
bird one associates with the west). These seemed to be breeding 
under the arch of Pont Rhyd Géch, on the Afon Erch. The Pied 
Wagtail was fairly common. I did not find Ray’s Wagtail, but 
Mr. T. A. Coward (who has paid several visits to the district), to 
whom I am indebted for some most interesting notes on the birds 
of Lleyn, tells me he has seen it at Abersoch and Nevin. The 
Rock-Pipit is common about the rocky parts of the coast, and is 
found on some at least of the islands. It was more abundant on 
one headland than in any other spot I have visited—a charming 
grassy headland studded with grey rocks, and at that time gay with 
Silene maritima, Armeria maritima, and EHrythrea littoralis; the 
home, too, ofthe rarer Scilla verna. The Pipits had, I think, hatched 
their young, and would sit on a stone, with an anxious manner, 
and utter unceasingly their cry of alarm or distress—a very high 
shrill ‘‘ chip” or ‘‘ chick”’—as long as one’s patience lasted. The 
call-note ‘‘ sneek”’ or “ snik”’ sounded all around, and some birds 
were in full song. This is “ tig tig tig,” &c. (rising flight), ‘‘ swik 
swik,” &c. (first part of falling flight), and then numerous more 
musical ‘‘tinks,” uttered very rapidly, to finish up with. The 
plumage of these Rock-Pipits even at that date was worn and 
brownish; the head distinctly greyer ; throat-patch light, a tiny 
eye-streak visible, and two bars on the wing conspicuous. ‘The 
Meadow Pipit is very common—among sand-hills on the coast, on 
the headlands, moorlands, and mountains. When alarmed for 
the safety of its nest or young, the note is a very sharp quick 
“ chittick,” somewhat like the sound made by a House-Cricket. 
Its rapid song always sounds to me very monotonous, there being 
usually only one change in it; it consists of a short quick 
“‘chewit”’ frequently repeated, followed by a still more rapidly 
uttered “chit” or ‘‘chee.” The name ‘“ Neighing-Bird,” be- 
stowed by Charleton on one or other of the Pipits, seems an 
appropriate one for this bird (‘ Exercitationes, 1677). I saw 
and heard the Tree-Pipit on several occasions. One near 
Llwyn-gwyn sat on a low flat-topped wall to sing the perching- 
song, then soared and returned to the spot. 

Mountain birds were, of course, rarely seen. As I ascended 


BIRDS OF LLEYN, WEST CARNARVONSHIRE. 491 


Yr Eifl to look at Carn Trer Ceiri, that wonderful ancient town 
of misty history, I came upon a pair of Ring-Ouzels carrying 
food; but a very long watch failed to reveal the exact place of 
their nest, which was either in thick bracken or a waste of grey 
rocks in the midst of it. The actions of the birds several times 
completely deceived me into making a descent on some spot, only 
to cause the birds to take up once more a commanding position, 
and resume their loud hard “tac tac tac.” Late in the afternoon 
I heard a few wild whistling notes. Probably this group of 
mountains is the westernmost outpost of the Ring-Ouzel in Car- 
narvonshire, from which county it has been known since the 
days of Willughby and Ray. “It is frequent on the high moun- 
tains of Caernarvanshire and Merionydhshire, where they call it 
Mwyalchen y graig, quasi dicas, Merula rupicola”’ (Ray’s ‘ Syn- 
opsis Methodica Avium,’ 1713). Although Ray distinguishes 
_between the Rock-Ouzel and the Ring-Ouzel, it is obvious that 
his description and Willughby’s, to which he refers, applies to 
the latter. The Song-Thrush was common, and the Blackbird 
still more so; to be found at the base of the headlands as far as 
a few bushes extended. The Mistle-Thrush I saw two or three 
times near Pwllheli. Mr. Coward has also met with a few. The 
Wheatear is a common bird. On the mountains and headlands 
and islands, as well as in some spots along the lower coast, the 
shrill highly pitched “ece”’ or ‘‘ ees,” followed by several hard 
‘*tacs”’ or ‘“‘tecs,’’ was a familiar sound as the pair of Wheatears, 
accompanied by their full-grown brood, flitted on before me. The 
only birds which enlivened the dry, stony, barren (the season had 
been unusually dry) top of Carn Fadryn were a family of Wheat- 
ears. I only saw the Whinchat twice—once at Abersoch, and 
once in a low pass among the hills near Nauhoran. Mr. Coward 
has seen a few near Abersoch. The “‘seet seet seet’’ (high), 
“chuch” or “ gurch,” or ‘‘ seet-gurch,”’ of the Stonechat was to 
be heard in all suitable places—among the gorse along the sand- 
hills, on the moorlands, mountain slopes, the headlands, and 
about the drier edges of the marshes. Lvidently the soft climate 
of Lleyn enables this resident to increase as it never can when 
exposed to the severe winters of parts of England, or obliged to 
migrate. I saw one bird with the white on its wing unusually 
largelv developed ; so much so that, seen at a distance, the bird 
2L2 


492 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


formed a conspicuous white spot on the stretch of moorland it 
inhabited. It was probably a partly white variety, but it was 
wild, and I could not get very close to it. 

Lleyn is thickly populated by small farmers, whose white 
houses are scattered all over the country, most of which is cut up 
into small fields. Inland we find hedges of blackthorn and haw- 
thorn, hazel, rose, and honeysuckle; but these are less frequent 
as we go west, and west of the Rhiw hills, as well as in other 
exposed parts of this windy country, the high stone and turf 
banks which enclose the fields are topped with little more than 
low gorse and bracken. Gorse, indeed—wide stretches of it— 
is a great feature of Lleyn. The grounds of the country houses 
are well planted, and there are many small woods and belts of 
plantation ; so that, although the country is not an ideal one for 
Warblers, there would be (except in the far west) sufficient 
accommodation for them. The Robin is very common, but I did 
not see a Redstart. ‘The true Warblers, with one exception, are 
remarkable for their scarcity or absence. The Whitethroat alone 
is common. I never identified either the Blackcap, Garden 
Warbler, or Lesser Whitethroat; but Mr. Coward observed a 
pair of the last named breeding at Abersoch in May, 1893. This 
noisy. bird, with which I am very familiar, must, however, be very 
rare. Once I thought I heard the alarm-note of the Blackcap; 
but, if it is present, it must be scarce. In the course of an 
afternoon’s walk at Dolgelly, on my way home, I heard two in 
song; so that I do not think it would have been silent in Lleyn 
during the time I was there, although the period of song of birds 
does vary in different districts in Great Britain. The Wood- 
Wren could be heard in several localities in oak and mixed wood, 
at Carn Bodfean, Bodegroes, Llanbedrog, &. The Chiffchaff 
I noticed in-five localities, but neither this bird nor the Willow- 
Wren could be called abundant, although the latter was common, 
and sang at all times in the day right through the latter half of 
June (and at Dolgelly on July 3rd). The Sedge-Warbler is 
common about the bogs and wetter marshes, and Mr. Coward has 
noted the Grasshopper- Warbler in two years at Llanbedrog. I 
did not consider the Hedge-Sparrow normally common, but this 
bird, like some others, is more in evidence earlier in the year. 
This remark applies especially to Tits, of which I only observed 


BIRDS OF LLEYN, WEST CARNARVONSHIRE. 493 


the Greater and the Blue, both fairly common. The Wren is 
remarkably abundant. The Tree-Creeper I saw once at Bode- 
groes. I saw no Red-backed Shrikes, but Mr. Coward found a 
pair breeding near Llanbedrog in June, 1887; a very interesting 
occurrence. The Spotted Flycatcher is fairly common; I saw it 
in five localities on or near the south coast. But the Pied Fly- 
catcher was looked for in vain. The Swallow is, I think, only 
fairly numerous, and the House-Martin rare. I saw one as far 
west as a pond between the village of Aberdaron and Braich y 
~Pwil. The Sand-Martin is quite common, haunting the sea- 
coast so much as to make the name of “ Shore Bird,’’ bestowed 
upon it by some early writers, seem natural and appropriate. 
There are colonies of Sand-Martins in the sand-cliffs near Llan- 
bedrog, and the wasting earthy cliffs of Porth Nigel (Hell’s 
Mouth). The Greenfinch and Linnet exist in fair numbers. I 
watched a pair of Goldfinches feeding their young in a nest built 
in an old plum-tree in a garden hedge at Efail-newydd, and saw 
a pair at Llanbedrog, and other birds at Pwllheli. Mr. Coward 
has seen a few at Abersoch, so it is probably not uncommon. 
The House-Sparrow would not seem numerous to anyone coming 
from a wheat-growing country, there being too little corn for 
it; but it long ago extended its range into the utmost limits of 
Lleyn. The Rev. W. Bingley, who travelled in Carnarvonshire 
in 1798, was told of Bardsey Isle:—‘ Till about four years 
ago no Sparrows had been known to breed here; three nests 
were, however, built during the same spring, and the produce has 
since completely colonized the place.” The Chaffinch is com- 
mon, and Mr. Coward adds the Bullfinch to my list. He has 
also seen a caged Lesser Redpoll, caught near Nevin in the 
winter. When I was on Yr Ejifl, I noticed one or two birds 
which I thought were Twites from their notes; but I could not 
identify the birds making the note, as they were very wild. Mr. 
Coward, however, saw ‘“‘ flocks on ‘The Rivals’ and Carn Mad- 
ryn”’ (in late summer); I could see no T'wites about the latter 
mountain (in June). 

To rear black cattle, tall white Pigs, and many grey Geese, 
with some useful low Horses, and a certain number of Sheep on 
the hills, is the occupation of the Lleyn farmer, rather than corn 
growing; but many of the small fields right up to the foot of 


494 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Mynydd Mawr are cropped with oats and barley. It seemed 
strange at first, in a climate so mild and soft that myrtles, 
hydrangeas, fuchsias, and large bushes of escallonia flourish in 
the cottage gardens, to be told that wheat is hardly worth grow- 
ing; but in Lleyn almost every wind comes off the sea, and it 
must be rarely that it enjoys a summer so hot and dry as that of 
1899, when haymaking was in full swing at Aberdaron at the end 
of June. But, notwithstanding the comparative scarcity of corn, 
the Corn-Bunting is an abundant bird as far westward, and as far 
on to the headlands, as the little fields extend, even unto the last 
of the fields before we climb the heathery slopes of Mynydd 
Mawr. I think the curiously local distribution of this bird does 
not depend on the presence or absence of corn; but the bird 
undoubtedly shows a liking for open cultivated ground near the 
sea-coast. The Yellow Bunting is a common roadside bird, and 
seemed richly coloured. I saw one with a particularly rich and 
brilliant yellow head. On June 28th I watched, and listened for 
some time to the song of, a male Cirl Bunting at Llanbedrog. I 
could hear another bird singing at a little distance. I noticed it 
again two days later (vide Zool. 1899, p. 822). The Reed- 
Bunting is common in the marshes. The Sky-Lark, as far as I 
saw, 1s not very numerous; and I do not think Lleyn would 
prove a good Partridge country, although I happened to put up 
two some distance apart from the side of a field-path in one day, 
and one does not see much of Partridges in June. Pheasants are 
to be heard in the covers, and I found the broken shell of an egg 
on Pwllheli sand-hills. The Eifl group is probably the western 
outpost in Carnarvonshire of the Red Grouse. I did not expect 
to see any Grouse there, and was much startled, as I was looking 
among the bracken for the young of a pair of Ring-Ouzels, at 
springing a pair within a few yards of my feet. They went away 
with a loud “ bek bek bek,”’ just like that of the Willow-Grouse. 
They had been scratching in the peaty soil, and I picked up some 
dark and richly coloured small feathers. 

The Corn-Crake is very abundant in Lleyn, almost every 
field with suitable covers holding one. A Corn-Crake used to 
crake from a little close quite in the new town of Pwllheli. It 
has been so much less common of late years in Oxfordshire than 
was formerly the case that I quite enjoyed hearing so much of it, 


‘BIRDS OF LLEYN, WEST CARNARVONSHIRE. 495 


and being able, as of yore, to hear its cry while I was in bed. 
The distribution of the Corn-Crake in the British Islands has 
been, and is, rather peculiar. It has always favoured the western 
parts and the north. The older writers on our ornithology 
(except Turner) seem to have been but little acquainted with it, 
and their knowledge of its identity even was not too clear. 
Turner described its habits, &c., well from observations in 
Northumberland (I quote from Ray’s ‘Willughby’), but the 
latter authors rely on his description, merely adding that, “ al- 
though this bird be more rare in England, yet it is found every- 
where in Ireland in great plenty.” It is fairly well figured in the 
‘Ornithology’ as ‘‘Ortygometra; the Rail or Daker Hen.” 
Charleton (whose first edition was published in 1668) knew next 
to nothing about it. He applied the name Daker Hen of Turner 
wrongly, but has the bird under the name Ortygometra, the 
Raile. ‘‘Raro ... est cursus velocissimi. Inter herbas & 
gramen sese abdit ut raro appareat”’ (‘Exercitationes,’ 1677). 
Ray’s ‘Synopsis’ takes us but little farther. ‘‘ Daker Hen or 
Rail. In Anglia rarior est. In Hibernia frequens habetur.”’ 
Pennant writes :—‘‘ They are in greatest plenty in Anglesea, 
where they appear about the twentieth of April, supposed to pass 
over from Ireland, where they abound; at their first arrival it is 
common to shoot seven or eight in a morning. They are found 
in most of the Hebrides, and the Orknies.”” The Corn-Crake 
seems to have been always somewhat local in England. In 
White’s day it was quite rare at Selborne, though abundant in 
Wilts, and about Oxford, where it has become more scarce of late 
years. The name Corn-Crake (by which the bird is almost 
invariably known in spring) was not general a century ago.. The 
bird is the Crake Gallinule of Pennant and Montagu, the latter 
giving Corn-Crake, Crek, or Cracker as provincial names. But 
Corn-Crake is an old name, and apparently originated in the 
north. We find ‘Corn-crek’’ as early as 1684 in the ‘Pro- 
dromus H.N. Scotie’ of Robert Sibbald, and ‘ Corn-craker,”’ 
in 1716, in Martin’s ‘Description of the Western Islands of 
Scotland’ (Pennant). Forster, in his ‘ Catalogue’ (1817), how- 
ever, has Corncrake as his first English name. 

Along some parts of the southern coast we find some grass 
marshes, noisy in June with the constant screams of numbers of 


496 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


breeding Peewits, and from which you may, at the end of the 
month, put up small flocks of wary Curlews. And on the banks 
of the more sluggish streams there are other lush green marshes, 
adorned with great clumps of yellow iris, crossed by ditches 
grown up with marsh-plants, and flecked here and there with 
cotton-grass, which tells of places which in a less dry season 
would be deep and boggy. At Abersoch there is a nice marsh, 
with a lot of reed-grown water, where Moor-hens chuckle, and 
the Wild Duck’s subdued quack may be heard in the evening ; 
Reed-Buntings chant, and Sedge-Warblers chatter, and Herons 
come down to feed. Snipe, too, may be flushed from thickets of 
fragrant bog-myrtle (Myrica gale), where the spongy turf is full 
of bog-loving plants, and in June was gay with spikes of deep 
purple Orchis incarnata, pink O. maculata, and pale, sweet 
Habenaria bifolia. Moor-hens are common in the district, and 
haunt quite small streams. Herons are often to be seen in the 
marshes and harbour, or flying over. Snipes breed in the 
marshes, and I flushed one from a meadow of good grass, and 
saw another ‘‘drumming”’ over the high moorland on Cilan 
headland. Peewits are quite common, having a sufficiency of 
semi-waste ground to breed on. On the moorland at Cilan a 
mobbing bird came within a yard of my head as I was innocently 
gathering and washing a rare bog plant. In some of the narrow 
green marshes along the coast Peewits are very abundant, and 
their cries become most wearisome in time. Some were already 
in flocks at the end of June. The Ringed Plover is found all 
along the pebbly and sandy parts of the coast, their soft clear 
‘“‘pe-ip’’ (syllables hardly divided) or ‘‘ peep” being a constant 
accompaniment to a walk along the beach. When two birds 
run together (perhaps to congratulate one another on their young 
having escaped observation), a chorus of “ tooley tooley tooley ” 
breaks forth from them. Oystercatchers are to be found all 
round the coast, at the base of rocky cliffs, on outlying rocks, and 
on the islands. I saw some, too, in Pwllheli harbour, and on 
the sands. Considerable numbers frequent one long raised 
pebble beach, in two terraces, which merges on the landward side 
in short turf or sand-hills. From the way they mobbed me 
(flying round rather high up, with a painfully monotonous cry, 
and anon coming straight at me) they seemed to have young. 


BIRDS OF LLEYN, WEST CARNARVONSHIRE. 497 


The mobbing cries are a short squeaky “‘ quik” and “ que-ah,”’ 
sometimes uttered together, “‘ quik-que-ah,” uttered quickly and 
peculiarly squeaky, and, under great excitement, fairly screamed ; 
but the note is always a short one. ‘There is no prettier orna- 
ment to a rocky coast than these Sea-pies, conspicuous from 
_ afar, and their ordinary high clear whistle ‘‘ fy-feet” or ‘‘feet”’ 
is always a pleasing sound. I saw birds with and without the 
_ white collar, and six flying together (some of which were dull 
_ birds) might have been a family party, the young hatched early. 

Lleyn is too well cultivated for much moorland to remain, but 
there are some little bits to be met with, inland as well as 
- on some of the headlands, and at the bases of the mountains, 
where the soil has proved too barren for a race of farmers who 

wrest from every bit of land what goodness lies in it. I saw no 
signs of Curlews breeding when I was in Lleyn, but their nesting 
season was probably past. Curlews were there, both on the 
coast and on inland fields, in flocks; once I sawa score together. 
_ I did not often hear the breeding-call, but the ordinary resonant 
flying note ‘‘k’lyike” or ‘“‘k’like,” uttered about three times, 
could be heard frequently at Pwllheli, when they resorted to the 
harbour muds at low tide. Isawone Whimbrel. Four Dunlins, 
_ in the dress of birds hatched in the previous year, were so tame, 
_ on the sands at low tide, that I walked within three or four yards 
_ of them. Each one was resting on one leg, and they did not even 
- trouble to put down the other one at first, but hopped away on 
one; so long did one bird remain thus that I began to think it had 
lost a leg. Afterwards they fed belly deep in the sea, and were 
occasionally lifted off their legs by the lap of a very gentle wave- 
let. Mr. Coward has seen flocks along the beach. This com- 
pletes my list of waders. But Mr. Coward saw five Purple Sand- 
pipers on St. ‘T'udwal’s Island on May 26th, 1893. Curiously 
- enough, I received, a good many years ago, a pair of these birds, 
which were shot on May 14th on this island. A Turnstone was 
seen at the same time. 

But, if Lleyn cannot boast of much in the way of mountains, 
few districts in southern Britain can match it for bold coast 
scenery; for, as Leland observes so quaintly, ‘‘ Al Lene is as it 
were a pointe into the se.”” Many fine headlands stretch out into 
Cardigan and Carnarvon bays, and into St. George’s Channel. 


498 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


West of Pwllheli we have Llanbedrog Point, Trwyn yr Wylfa, 
Trwyn Cilan (or Penkilan Head), Mynydd Penarfynydd, Trwyn ~ 
y Penrhyn, Pen y Cil, Mynydd Mawr, from which one looks 
across to Ynys Enlh, or Bardsey Island, and across to Ireland in 
clear weather ; while on the northward shore are Braich Anne- 
log, Penrhyn Mawr, Penrhyn Golman, Dinlleyn Point, Penrhyn 
Glas, and many minor points. On some of these headlands the 
graceful buoyant flight, with airy curves, of the Chough may 
still, though rarely, be admired; but the bird is getting very 
scarce, and it is seldom that one gets a chance of watching a pair 
feeding on a broken cliff or hillside, with their quick walk and 
hops, poking their bills into the earth and under the stones. We 
have few more beautiful birds on our list than the Chough, with 
its glossy purple plumage and elegant form. Choughs sometimes 
join Rooks and Jackdaws when feeding, but, as they rise together, 
their more highly pitched note, clearer and more melodious, as 
well as their widely separated pinions (upturned at the tips), 
looking like a fringe of feathers, at once distinguishes the 
Choughs, even at a considerable distance. They certainly do 
cry “‘k’chouf’’ sometimes, but their more usual cry is a clear 
ringing “k’chare.’ Another note, uttered on the wing, is 
‘*k’queue.” I heard also some weak “‘kares”’ from five birds 
flying together (perhaps a family party), which were possibly the 
cries of the young birds. It is probable that upon observations 
made in Lleyn was founded the statement in Willughby’s 
‘ Ornithology’ and Ray’s ‘ Synopsis,’ that the Chough was found 
not only in Cornwall, but also in Wales. It is certain that one 
of these authors (I think, Ray) penetrated Lleyn as far as Aber- 
daron, for they mention seeing there a Starling with a black head 
and the rest of the body white. It is at first surprising to meet 
with the name of Aberdaron in this early work on birds; for it is 
now perhaps as remote as any village in Wales, and it entails a 
drive of seventeen miles from the nearest railway station before 
you sight its housetops, its low Norman church, and its tiny bay, 
below a hill so steep and stony as to try the surefootedness of one 
of Lleyn’s own horses. But Aberdaron was probably much better 
known in the days when Ynys Enlli was still accounted a holy 
isle. The Starling is numerous, but I only once noticed Jays ; 
and Mr. Coward’s experience is the same. Magpies are common. 


BIRDS OF LLEYN, WEST CARNARVONSHIRE. 499 


I saw Carrion-Crows on ‘‘ The Rivals,” and about Pwllheli 
Harbour. A pair, much agitated for the safety of a young one 
which could barely fly, on the seaward face of Mynydd Mawr, 
afforded a study in geographical distribution; for, unless the 
eyesight of those Crows was inferior to my own (which is not 
likely), they could look out that day on a land which is not in- 
habited by their race. On that bright clear afternoon, across the 
blue channel, we could just catch sight of the Wicklow moun- 
tains ; and, although the Carrion-Crow is recorded as breeding 
_ sparingly in some parts of the sister island, this particular bit of 
Ireland is, I believe, not one of them. And to this day the 
words of Giraldus Cambrensis, written in the twelfth century, 
hold good of Ireland: ‘“‘ Also there are no black Crows in this 
country, or they are very rare; they are all parti-coloured.”” The 
_ Hooded Crow is, I believe, uncommon on the Welsh coast, even 
in winter; but I have seen a hybrid between the two forms, which 
was killed in Merionethshire. A pair of Ravens were wheeling 
about the tops of “‘ The Rivals,” uttering a few ‘‘ corps,” and I 
_ saw another pair round one of the headlands. A pair is also said 
to swell the list of birds breeding on the stupendous cliffs of Pen 
_ Cilan. The Jackdaw is one of the most noticeable birds in this 

_ partof Wales. It breeds abundantly in the cliffs, as well as about 
_ buildings, and in the villages may be seen sitting on the houses 
and chapels. A pair were breeding in a chimney, for bits of 
_ nesting material were sticking out of an ordinary chimney-pot, on 
_ which a Daw was perched, and the cries of the young came from 
within. The Rook was in fair numbers. A little flock feeding 
on the upper slopes of ‘‘ The Rivals,” and wishing to descend to 
_ the lower grounds, flew out from the mountain side until they 
_ had a clear drop below them, and then suddenly whizzed down 
with short zigzag flights, making a rushing sound like a rocket. 

; Ring-Doves did not seem to be abundant. Stock-Doves are 
_ to be found round the coast, about tbe cliffs and sand-hills. 
Neither Mr. Coward nor I met with the Turtle-Dove. The Swift 


_ is numerous. Numbers were wheeling round Trer Ceiri, or one 


of the summits of Yr Hifl. Possibly they breed among the mass 
of grey rock forming the steep ramparts on the east side. I saw 
them nowhere on the mountain, except just over the ancient town. 
One afternoon some hundreds were flying over the craggy heights 


500 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


above Pwllheli. Swifts were flying over the highest parts of 
Mynydd Mawr, some way from the most outlying cottage. — 
Possibly most of the West Lleyn Swifts breed in natural sites. 
Mr. Coward has noticed the Nightjar in three localities. The 
Cuckoo was everywhere in average numbers, and a great many — 
haunted the sand-hills at Abersoch, which are bordered on the 
inland side by a mass of bracken. Five were in sight at one 
time, beating over the fern. Whenever I passed I saw some, and 
one got up at my feet from under a bush. I noticed the Green 
Woodpecker several times, and saw some holes in an old ash at 
Llanbedrog. This is rather a common bird in suitable localities 
in North Wales, in my experience. For an early record of it in 
North Wales, we may refer to Giraldus Cambrensis, who, while 
travelling with Baldwin, Archbishop of Canterbury, in the year 
1188, seems to have heard a Greer. Woodpecker in a wood near 
the Menai Strait. It is true that some of the party declared it 
was an aureolus, and Giraldus thought rightly so; but other 
people since those days seemed to have been unable to distinguish | 
between a Green Woodpecker and a Golden Oriole, It isa pity | 
that Giraldus, who tells us something of the birds of Ireland, has 
so little to say in this respect about Wales. He refers, indeed, | 
to the large and generous race of Falcons at Pembroke, and | 
casually mentions a Kite being killed by a Weasel on which it | 
had pounced. Also, in conversation during his travels, the | 
absence of the Nightingale was commented upon, causing the | 
Archbishop (who evidently did not like Wales) to observe that 
the bird was wiser than they were ! 

Birds of prey were scarce. A female Merlin rose, not ten 
yards away, from a low turfy cliff on one of the headlands; and | 
Mr. Coward has seen two or three, and mentions a nesting site. | 
He has also seen the Sparrow-Hawk once, but I did not. Kestrels } 
are to be seen along the coast, as well as inland. At least one | 
pair of Peregrines (called simply ‘‘ Falcon’’) breed on the clifis. 
Their eggs escape on account of the difficulty of discovering 
their whereabouts, but directly the whitish downy young are 
hatched they are usually detected, at least so an old cliff-climber | 
told me. A Falcon comes to one of the islands occasionally to | 
fetch a Puffin. Cormorants are not uncommon about the harbour | 
and most of the rocky parts of the coast. They breed on St. | 


BIRDS OF LLEYN, WEST CARNARVONSHIRE. 501 


-Tudwal’s Island (in April), where I saw empty nests; but about 
fifteen birds, old and young, sat about the rocks. Some of the 
former were magnificent birds. A small double-headed point 
near Afon Wen is the resort of Cormorants. The smaller (west) 
point and a partly detached rock were slightly ‘‘ washed’”’; but on 
the east rocks, when I came in sight of them, sat nineteen old 
and young birds. The upper parts of the rocks were strewn with 
fish-bones and bits of crustaceans, and the hollows were thick 
with wash, the stench being appalling. Possibly the birds nest 
on the lower rocks, which I could not see, the upper parts over- 
hanging. I saw a few Shags on various parts of the coast; they 
breed on St. Tudwal’s. A few fine old birds in shining green 
dress sat peering out from the ledges in the little caves, and 
were unwilling to move. Wild Ducks seemed fairly numerous 
about the sluggish parts of Afon Penrhos and Afon Rhyd a 
and in the marshes. 

Adult Black-headed Gulls in full summer dress were not un- 
common on the sands, and their laughing cry was sometimes 
heard, but I saw only two or three immature birds (not young of 
the year). I know of no breeding place anywhere near here. 
None breed at Mochras Island now, if they ever did. There is a 
colony in Merionethshire, forty miles away. It is difficult to 
say what adult birds were doing here in June. Herring-Gulls 
_ breed in small numbers on various parts of the coast. The mob- 
bing cry of this bird, as the birds fly straight at you, rising with a 
_ curve as they pass over, rather high up, sounds like ‘‘ ag-cag”’ or 
** ag-cag-cag’’; 1t is not nearly so pleasant a sound as the ordinary 
_ “akow”’ or *‘ kow-wow.”’ Some Gulls breeding on a little island 
_ called Gull Island (Ynys Gwylan) are probably, partly at all 
_ events, of this species. A nest on one of the islands was ona 
broad ledge, close to the rock face, and not far above sea-level. 
_It was a large thick-walled, cup-shaped nest, made of grass-roots 
and dead grass, with a few odd feathers worked in; it contained 
_ only one egg. I only saw the Lesser Black-backed Gull twice, 
but it is said to breed on one of the islands. Mr. Coward saw 
them at one of the southern headlands, and plentifully on the 
north coast. One pair of the Great Black-backed Gull is said to 
have bred on one of the islands; indeed, I have seen an egg 
which was taken on Mercrosse two or three years ago. I saw an 


502 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


adult bird in Pwllheli harbour. The Kittiwake breeds on one 
range of very high cliffs; I saw the eggs. Mr. Coward mentions 
two other breeding stations. The Lesser Tern seemed scarce. I 
found two pairs some miles apart, and spent a long time watching 
these beautiful birds hawking over the shallows, with their beaks 
pointing straight down, to descend presently with a splash, and 
rise with a small fish held crosswise. The ordinary cry is 
‘“‘squek,” uttered rapidly two or three times, or a single “ kik,” 
which changes to a loud angry “jek” when the birds are 
aroused. Mr. Coward has seen either Common or Arctic Terns 
off the coast. 

Although the headlands of Lleyn are bold and high (Cilan, — 
340 ft.; Mynydd Mawr, upwards of 400 ft.; Mynydd Annelog, 
500 ft.; Graig ddu, 700 ft.), sheer cliffs dropping at once from — 
the highest level, like those of Flamborough Head, do not 
occur. The way of these is rather to slope down—often 
rapidly, indeed, with a face more or less broken—for some dis- 
tance, and end in a sheer cliff of, comparatively speaking, no 
great height, and perhaps an outwork of jagged rocks formed by 
the wearing of the sloping strata. Sometimes little rocky holms, 
parted from the cliff, lie just off shore. When these steep slopes 
are covered with heather or dwarf gorse, or much broken, with 
outcropping rocks, it is easy to approach the cliff-edge; but 
when, as 1s often the case, these great slopes are steep as a 
house-roof, somewhat hog-backed, and merely covered with short 
turf (doubiy short and slippery when I was there after a long 
spell of dry weather), the risk of a slip, with small chance of a 
recovery, becomes too great. On one of these slopes I caught 
the Irish Burnet Moth, which Mr. Coward discovered there some 
years ago. Swarms of Puffins inhabit St. Tudwal’s Island. As 
you approach the island you pass through great numbers scat- 
tered over the sea, and they sit in masses on the land ; the turf 
in places is riddled with their holes, and the air is full of birds_ 
coming and going. Towards dusk many more come in from — 
distant feeding grounds. ‘There is also another great colony on 
Mercrosse, on the west side, and in a less degree on the grassy 
slope up from the landing-place. Puffins were sitting there, 
thickly gathered, on the flattened-down turf and sea-pink ; per- 
haps a third as many more were on the sea, and at least another — 


BIRDS OF LLEYN, WEST CARNARVONSHIRE. 503 


third underground, incubation being in full swing. The Puffins 
come to the islands about March 28th or 29th (or, as another 
man said, “about the tail-end of the month’’) for a few days to 
look about them, but not many come then. They come in full 
force at the latter end of April, and come to land about May 
10th; they leave about Aug. 15th, but late breeding birds will 
stay nearly a fortnight later for the sake of their young; but if 
the latter are not ready to go then they are left. Marked birds 
have been known to return, and it is believed that they return to 
their old holes. The burrow of one old marked bird was blocked 
up with small stones one spring before the Puffins returned. The 
same bird after a time removed all the stones to a distance, and 
occupied its old home. I noticed that the Puffins did not rise 
well from flat ground, unless they could get a clear run, or the 
wind was against them; but they get up very readily with the 
_ least slope in their favour, unless the grass is long. Stray pairs 
were breeding where there was long grass, and these, on emerging 
from their holes, brushed the grass with frantic efforts for some 
_ distance, striding out vigorously with their orange legs. They 
_ prefer a sloping spot and short turf, or a bit of ground covered 
with sea-pink ; probably they keep the turf short when they nest 
in great numbers, for they trample it flat, and in some places it is 
_ brown and looks dead. Here they run quickly and well. A sour 
smell comes on the wind when it blows over the burrows in such 
places. The silence of the Puffins was remarkable ; it was rarely 
that a hard “arrr’’ was heard. Sometimes a grating guttural 
_ “go-ay” or ‘“‘ garr” could be heard from a bird below ground ; 
_ but this is heard much more frequently when the birds have 
young. But when I stood close to hundreds of birds I did not 
_ hear a sound from them, until, as I approached within a few 
_ yards, they rose with a rattle and rush of wings, and filled the 
_ air like bees round a disturbed hive. A single bird will admit of 
' an approach within two or three yards without moving, merely 
. regarding you intently with its dark grey eye. On June 23rd 
' the eggs (much discoloured with brown earth stains), some of 
which lay within arm’s reach, were hard sat, and some young 
were just hatched. In this state, with the pip on the bill and the 
_ egg-shells under it, the young is covered with long down, black 
all over except the white belly. Bill dark horn-colour, and much 


504 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


longer than it is deep. I think only a few young were hatched; 
I saw no old birds carrying fish. The nests I examined consisted 
of a small quantity of grass-roots and dead grass—never more 
than a little, and in some cases hardly any. Accounts given of a 
Puffin’s bite differ. They bite hard, and can draw blood from 
the soft parts of the fingers if they nip up a small piece of flesh ; 
otherwise the bite is merely painful, though it is said that if you 
snatch you hand away the flesh is sometimes torn. Puffins can 
scratch also. They are ferocious fighters ; I saw two fighting at 
the mouth of a burrow, and they only left off when I came close 
to them. A keen observer told me he had seen them grapple with 


one another, and roll over and over down the slope until they © 


fell over the low cliff and into the sea, still hanging on like 
bull-dogs. 


Guillemots breed at Cilan, on St. Tudwal’s, and, as Mr. | 
Coward tells me, near Nevin. Of thirty eggs which had been 


taken at Cilan for food, the dark green type, heavily marked 
with black, outnumbered all other varieties by five to one. At 
St. Tudwal’s, too, this variety prevailed. The Guillemots, 
sitting upright on the ledges, had to be pelted with small stones 
in some cases before they would leave their eggs, and even then 
they shuffled the eggs carefully from under them, leaving the big 
end next to the wall, before dropping off the ledges. They dis- 
like leaving the eggs for fear of being robbed by the Gulls; and, 
sure enough, a Lesser Black-back appeared on the scene almost 
at once, speering about the cliff. Two birds sitting on eggs only 
a foot apart were very interesting, for one was of the ordinary 
type, and the other a well-marked example of the Ringed 
Guillemot (as brown, though, as its neighbour). When at last I 
induced them to leave their eggs, I saw that both these had a 
green ground colour, marked with black. 

Rock birds, I think, of all three species inhabit one or two 


small islands off the westernmost part of Lleyn. I hope to visit — 


them next spring. Gulls breed there too, which is not surprising, 
as the Welsh names signify Great and Little Gull Island. Some 
Razorbills breed with the Guillemots about the great cliffs about 
Trwyn Careg y tir and Mynydd Cilan. From above, the birds 
on the sea were only just visible to the naked eye; yet the cry, 
like that of an angry barn-door cock, came up fairly loud at 


ie 
ay 


BIRDS OF LLEYN, WEST CARNARVONSHIRE. 505 


times. With the aid of the glass, I made out (judging from the 
birds on the sea) that there was about one Razorbill (easily dis- 
tinguished by its neater shape, head drawn back and tail raised, 
from the paler and browner Guillemots) to every six or eight of 
the latter birds. A few Razorbills breed on St. Tudwal’s; and at 
the date of my visit were sitting on eggs in shallow cracks and 
covered ledges for the most part, but one or two were on open 
ledges. They all occupied detached places, and did not sit two 
or three close together like Guillemots. In every case but one 
the birds sat or lay on the eggs in a semi-horizontal position ; 
the exception was half upright, but, as I could see its eggs, it was 


- probably alarmed. When sufficiently alarmed they shuffled their 


eggs from under them, stood up, and dropped off the ledges. As 
Mr. Coward found Razorbills plentiful at sea near Nevin, they 


_ probably breed on the north coast also. As to the Manx Shear- 


water, I am unable to add anything of importance to what Mr. 


Coward has already recorded in ‘The Zoologist.’ There is, 
_ however, no doubt that ‘‘ Mackerel Cocks” breed on the main- 
land, and some of the islands of western Lleyn. This is not 


surprising when we remember that a great breeding haunt of this 
species lies off the southern horn of Cardigan Bay. Isaw remains 
of two or three dead birds, and when off in a boat one morning 
saw five skimming low over a rather lively sea; but they are 
chiefly nocturnal. They strike the light sometimes, and flutter 
down into the court. They are very stupid, and make no attempt 
to escape, but fly away when thrown up into the air. I was told 


that when the Mackerel come into one of the bays in July and 


August lots of Shearwaters were seen over the shoals. 
I have only to add that this paper applies to the western part 
of the Carnarvon promontory, and that it is offered as a small 


instalment towards the history of the Birds of North Wales. 
_ During the spring of 1900 I hope to continue my observations. 


Zool, 4th ser. vol, IV., November, 1900, 2M 


506 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


BREEDING OF THE TUFTED DUCK (FULIGULA 
CRISTATA) IN SHROPSHIRE, 


By H. E. Forrest. 


Tue late Mr. W. E. Beckwith says of this species :—‘‘ The 
Tufted Duck is rather common on pools in Shropshire in 
winter, being often found with Pochards, and, though the 
females or young birds are always much more plentiful than 
the handsome adult males, I frequently see the latter on the 
Ellesmere meres. About the year 1855 a pair of Tufted Ducks 
bred near Shifnal, and several pairs now breed regularly in that 
neighbourhood. I have also seen one with young ones in June 
on a pool near Shrewsbury ; and, in the summer of 1885, I saw 
a pair of Tufted Ducks, but without young, on Whitemere, near 
Ellesmere. Except in hard frost, this Duck is not often seen on 
the Severn.” — The ‘ Field,’ Dec. 19th, 1885. 

Mr. W. H. Slaney writes that “‘the bird is common on the 
large meres of Stafford and Shropshire [in winter], and that he 
has known of one nest in the latter county.’”—A. G. More, “ On 


the distribution of birds in Great Britain during nesting season,” — 


‘Tbis,’ 1865. ‘I'he nest mentioned is the one at Shifnal alluded 
to above. Col. Kenyon Slaney informs me that he thinks the 
nest was at Hatton, Shifnal. There have been one or two nests 
there during the last few years; the birds probably belong to the 
larger colony at Weston, to be next described. 

Col. the Hon. F. O. Bridgeman informs me that at Weston 
Park, the Earl of Bradford’s estate on the borders of Stafford 
and Shropshire, the Tufted Duck has bred regularly ever since 
1880. Its numbers have steadily increased, till now there are 
about twenty pairs nesting on five or six pools. The birds here 
have lost the migratory habit, and become residents, although, 
like other Anatide, the Tufted Duck is normally a winter 
migrant; even here the colony in winter is increased by visitors. 

On January 4th, this year, when visiting Ellesmere mere, in 
company with Mr. Brownlow Tower, I saw about two hundred 


eee ae eee 


BREEDING OF THE TUFTED DUCK. 507 


_ of these pretty birds swimming about. They are reputed to be 
very wild and wary, but, at Ellesmere, being carefully protected, 


they are unusually tame, and will often come within twenty 
yards of the observer. Like other diving Ducks, they sit low in 


the water. They are energetic divers; and the drake is a hand- 


some bird, conspicuous at a distance, and easily distinguished by 


his white flanks and black back. The female is of a dark 


brown hue. Mr. Tower, who has observed the birds on the 
meres continuously for many years, tells me that, although the 
Tufted Duck visits Ellesmere regularly every winter in large 
numbers, not a single pair has ever been known to remain to 
breed. This is the more remarkable as there are so many 
suitable meres there, and they breed at Sandford only eight 
miles away. 

Messrs. Coward and Oldham, in their new book on the 
‘Birds of Cheshire’ (1900), also state that the Tufted Duck has 
not been known to breed in Cheshire, though suitable nesting 
places are abundant in that county. 

At Sandford Pool, near Whitchurch, Salop, close to the 
Cheshire border, four pairs of Tufted Ducks came and nested 
in 1891, in the reedy marsh at the northern end, and they have 
continued to do so ever since. Strange to say, there have always 
been neither more nor less than four pairs, while—unlike the 
Weston Park birds—they have not become residents. They 
arrive each year early in March; nest towards the end of May; 
and leave, with the young, about the beginning of November. 
The young birds, which number about thirty each year, do. not 
return to their native pool. There is no apparent reason why 
the birds should not winter here, and so become residents, as at 
Weston. We can only surmise that the hereditary instinct is so 
strong that, when the usual time of migration arrives, they 


_ feel impelled to depart, though they might just as well stay 


where they spent the summer. Although I have no proof to 
give, I fancy that the Ducks at Sandford only go away as far as 
Ellesmere, and join company with the crowds that are migrating 
just at that time. If so, the four pairs at Sandford are pro- 
bably the same individuals year after year, whilst their progeny— 
instead of returning with them to Sandford—depart northwards 
with their Kllesmere companions. 
2m 2 


508 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


We find, then, that the Tufted Ducks at— 
Ellesmere are winter visitors only. 
Sandford ,, summer ,, A 
Weston » residents. 

Wishing to observe these Ducks in their breeding haunts, I 
this year paid two visits to Sandford Pool, by kind invitation of 
Mrs. Sandford. The first visit was on May 10th, when all eight 
birds—four drakes and four ducks—were swimming about on 
the open water; apparently not yet nesting, [Subsequent events 
showed that the Ducks had already laid eggs, and they began to 
sit within the following week.] 

On the pool was a Swan's nest, containing seven cygnets, and 
two eggs just hatching—an unusually large clutch—all afterwards 
reared successfully. I obtained several excellent photographs of 
these cygnets in the nest. On the approach of the punt, the 
mother Swan, who was sitting, got up and slipped into the water, 
where, joining her mate, the pair swam round in circles, only be- 
traying wrath at the intrusion by an occasional hiss. This rather 
belies the reputed ferocity of the Swan in the breeding season. 

Three weeks later the keeper at Sandford reported that he 
had found a Tufted Duck’s nest with eggs, so on June Ist I paid 
a second visit to the pool. This time there were no drakes to 
be seen, but there was one duck swimming about. The eggs in 
the nest found by the keeper had hatched out the day before my 
visit, and both ducks and ducklings had disappeared. However, 
after a long search, the keeper found another nest with eight eggs 
in it. Of this I obtained a good photograph. Soon afterwards I 
found another nest with eggs, and an empty nest which appeared 
to have been vacated for some days. Close to this last was an 
egg which had evidently rolled out of the nest, for, when blown, | 
it proved not to have been incubated. Thus all four nests be- 
longing to the four pairs of ducks were accounted for—two with 
eggs in, and two hatched out. 

The nests are hard to find, for they are placed on marshy 
ground beneath, and entirely concealed by, dead reeds and 
rushes. They are made of rushes in the form of a mound, with 
a deep cup in the centre. The cup is lined with down, inter- 
mixed with fragments of dead rushes. The down is very dark 
brown, with a dirty white,fleck in the centre of each bit. It is 


BREEDING OF THE TUFTED DUCK. 509 


larger than Teal’s down, and the fleck is not nearly so con- 
Spicuous or white. The eggs in the nest photographed were 
greenish, but in the second nest, off which I flushed the old 
duck, they were coloured like a Pheasant’s. The solitary egg 
was of the latter type. 

When the duck leaves the nest to feed—and she is then away 
for an hour or more at a time—she carefully covers the eggs with 


Nest of Tufted Duck (Fuligula cristata). 


down. The duck which I saw swimming on the pool was the 
owner of the nest photographed, yet, although she had been 
absent for nearly an hour by the keeper’s observation, the eggs 
were quite warm. In order to photograph the nest it was 
necessary to push the rushes over it to right and left, as well as 
to remove the covering of down. 


510 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


The ducklings, before they are twenty-four hours old, take to 
the water and go off with the mother. For the first week or so 
they keep hidden away amongst the rushes, &c., but afterwards 
appear on the open water, swimming about with the mother. 
They never return to the nest after once quitting it—not even to 
roost. 

The drakes, as soon as their mates begin to sit, spend a good 
deal of their time at their “club”’—a pool about half a mile 
away. ‘They condescend to return to their families later on, 
when the latter are growing up, but they take no part in the 
sitting, nor in feeding the spouse on the nest, nor do they ever 
help to feed or look after the young. In short, they are not 
at all patterns of marital behaviour. 

Although the pool at Sandford is private, and the ducks have 
never been molested, they are very shy, and would never allow me 
to get near enough with the camera to take a snap-shot of them 
on the water. They would rise while still sixty or eighty yards 
away, and, after flying round in wide circles for some minutes, 
alight on a distant part of the pool. 


Since penning the foregoing notes I have heard from Col. 
Kenyon Slaney that the Tufted Duck still breeds at Hatton 
Grange, and has done so almost every year as far back as he can 
remember. The water there is but small, and only one, or per- 
haps two, pairs nest on it. Practically the Hatton birds belong 
to the Weston colony, although the founders appear to have 
settled first at Hatton, and thence to have colonized Weston. 


(511: 4 


THE ORIGIN AND MEANING OF THE NAMES 
OF BRITISH BIRDS. 


By A. H. MEIKLEJouN. 


ALTHOUGH the names of our commoner British Birds are 
more or less familiar to everyone, but little attention appears to 
have been given to their original source and significance. The 
subjoined list does not in any way lay claim to complete fulness, 
but itis put forward in the hope that it may possibly arouse some 
interest in this neglected side of our bird-nomenclature. In most 
birds’ names special stress is invariably laid on some well-known 
or easily distinguished peculiarity either in cry, flight, or appear- 
ance. It is interesting to note how many names are imitative of 
birds’ cries, as in pipit, shrike, twite, crow, owl, crake, &c., and 
more especially in cuckoo, hoopoe, and kittwwake. The origin of 
some of the names appears to be quite unknown, e.g. gull, auk, 
garganey, &c. In the list given below no attempt has been made 
to follow out the meaning of a name with a too great philological 
keenness, as in that case I should be exceeding the necessarily 
limited province of a paper of this kind. 


FIELDFARE — field-farer, 7.e. ‘‘ the crosser (or traverser) of 
the fields »—in allusion, of course, to its migratory habits. 

OusEL is simply a variation of the German amsel, a Black- 
bird. 

WHEATEAR, probably = white-erse (arse) = white-rump—the 
last a common name for the bird in Scotland and elsewhere. 
Compare the French, cul blane. Another suggested, though far 
less probable, derivation is that it = whitty-er =: whitterer, from 
whitter, ‘‘to complain ’’—a word still used, I believe, in some 
parts of Lincolnshire. 

REDsTART = red-tail. (Compare waastTart for wagtail.) The 
idea that sraRT may here have the meaning of ‘“‘to twitch or 


512 THE. ZOOLOGIST. 


move involuntarily”? should not be lost sight of. The con- 
struction ‘‘ red-twitcher ”’ certainly characterizes the well-known 
vibration of the bird’s tail. 

Rosin is simply a familiar form of RoBprert (cf. MaG-pie, JACK- 
daw, and marTIN). A possible connection with ruby has been 
suggested, but this is unlikely. 

NIGHTINGALE = Anglo-Saxon nihte-galle, ‘‘ the singer of the 
night.” 

Diprer. This may either mean “the bird that dives for a 
short time” (dips), or it has reference more probably to the 
peculiar dipping ‘‘ bob”’ of the bird while standing on a stone in 
mid-stream. 

Titmouse; spelt by Spenser, rrrMosrE. Both rrr (cf. tit-lark) 
and mMousE have the same meaning, viz. “small.” The proper 
plural of the word is therefore Trr™movusEsS—mouse, in this case, 
having no connection with the rodent of that name. In Suffolk 
the plural TITMovSEN is still used. 

NutrHAtcH = nut*hacker. 

ORIOLE = the golden bird (Latin, awreolus). 

SwALLow may possibly mean “the tosser about” or ‘‘ mover 
to and fro,” allied to the Greek caacvew, to shake. On the other 
hand, the Teutonic name, swalgwon, points to a possible con- 
nection with aaxuwv, “a kingfisher,” owing perhaps to the appear- 
ance of the Swallow during the fine weather of the ‘‘ Halcyon 
days.” 

FincH is probably imitative of the Chaffinch’s call-note—a 
bird common all over Kurope; but it is possibly a variation of 
the German /ink, “smart” or “gay.” 3 

Sparrow = the flutterer, from a root spar, to quiver. It is, 
however, not improbable that spar may here have its meaning of 
“to wrangle,” in reference to the constant bickerings of these 
birds. 

LinvEtT, so called from its fondness for the seeds of linum, — 
flax or hemp. 

Bunting probably means “‘ the little speckled bird,” from the 
German bunt, “speckled,” + ing, a diminute ending. There is, 
however, some possibility of its connection with a Lowland 
Scotch word, buntin, meaning “short and thick.” In Scotland 
bunt is still used for a rabbit’s “ scut.”’ 


THE NAMES OF BRITISH BIRDS. 5118 


Cuovueu is akin to “‘ Caw,” and is therefore imitative. 

Jay (older spelling Gay or Gat) = a bird of gay plumage. 

Pir is imitative, and signifies ‘a chirper.” It is probably 
akin to Latin picus. 

Raven = Anglo-Saxon hraefn, probably connected with KrapP, 
to make a noise; cf. Latin crepare. The word has absolutely 
nothing to do with RAVENOUS, &c., which is akin to rapine. 

Roox—in Anglo-Saxon, hréc, “‘a croaker ’"—1is imitative. 

Lark is a contraction of LAVROCK or LAVEROCK ; Anglo-Saxon, 
lawerce. In Icelandic there is a word lae-wirki, ‘‘ a worker of 
guile,” and it has been suggested that léwerce is another form of 
this. Should this be correct, it would appear that the Lark 
must for some reason have been a bird of ill-omen to our Anglo- 
Saxon ancestors. 

Owt is imitative, and connected with How1, which appears in 
‘* howlet.” 

VULTURE = the tearer (Latin, vellere). 

Buzzarp, formerly spelt BusaRD, which comes through Low 
Latin from the Latin buteo—a word used by Pliny to signify the 
Sparrow-Hawk. 

Hawk, “the seizer.”’ Root HAB, as in German haben. 

Kits probably comes from a Teutonic root skort, ‘‘ to shoot ” 
or “ go swiftly’; and the same root is seen in ScoTER, and in the 
American slang word “ scoot.” 

F'atcon, so called from its sickle- (Lat. falx) shaped beak and 
talons. 

MERLIN comes, through the French, from the Latin merula, a 
blackbird ; cf. merle. 

OspREY is a corruption of ossifragus, ‘‘ the bone-breaker.”’ 

CORMORANT is a corruption of Corvus marinus, ‘‘ the sea- 
crow.”. The Spanish name is Cuervo marino. 

SHaa, so called from its crest. It is practically the same 
word as the Scandivanian skagg, ‘“‘a beard,” or anything that 
juts out. 

GaNNET, “‘little goose.” Root Gan (as in gan-der) -++ diminu- 
tive suffix -ET. 

Heron* is probably imitative of the bird’s cry, and, in 

* The form hernshaw is a variant of heronsew—a word still used pro- 
vincially, and derived, like many other hawking terms, from the French. 


514 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


this case, is connected with the German hdher, a jackdaw, lit. 
“laughter.” Cf. HEIGHAW, a provincial name for the Green 
Woodpecker. | ) 

BITTERN was erroneously supposed to be a corruption of 
bos taurus, in reference to the bird’s bellowing capabilities. It is 
more probably a variation of the Latin butio, an imitative word 
connected with bubere, to cry. 

Stork probably means “ the tall bird,” connected with Anglo- 
Saxon stealc, high. 

SHELDRAKE. Sheld, flecked or variegated, simply = shield, in 
allusion to the ornamentation, with which these weapons were 
covered. Cf. SHELD-APPLE, a Chaffinch. 

MALLARD = male-ard. The suffix -ard was frequently added 
to masculine names for the sake of emphasis. ‘The word there- 
fore rightly refers to the drake only. 

GADWALL remains undecipherable. 

TEAL originally meant ‘‘a brood,” from telen, to breed; but — 
as to the origin of its use in a specific sense nothing is known. 

GARGANEY, a name first introduced, I believe, by Willughby 
from Gesner. Nothing is known of its meaning or origin. 

WieeEon, Old French vigeon, has perhaps a connection with 
the Latin vipio, a small Crane with a whistling cry; but this is 
extremely problematical. 

Pocuarp is said to be a variation of PoacHEer. Apparently 
the name at first referred to the Wigeon, in allusion to its sup- 
posed habit of seizing (poaching) the food brought to the surface 
by the diving ducks. 

Scorer. See under Kite. 

Smew, and similarly smer and sMeATH, is probably imitative 
of the bird’s ‘‘ mewing”’ cry. The suggestion that the word is a 
corruption of ‘‘ice-mew”’ is untenable. 

CAPERCAILLIE = Gaelic capull-coille, “‘ great cock (or horse) of 
the wood.” The word capull has probably some connection with 
Latin caballus. 

GROUSE, curiously enough, has been falsely formed on the 
analogy of mMousE. The original spelling is grice, from an Old 
French word griesche, grey, thus giving the meaning of “the grey 
bird.”” A derivation from the Welsh grugiar, a heath-hen (grug, 
heath + ia7, a hen) has also been suggested. 


THE NAMES OF BRITISH BIRDS. 515 


PTARMIGAN is a French spelling of the Gaelic tarmachan. 
What the word means is unknown, though it should be noted 
that there is, in Gaelic, a verb tarmaich, to gather, with which 
tarmachan may have some connection. 

* Pueasant, the bird from the Phasis, a river in Transcaucasia 
(Colchis), now called the Rion. 

PARTRIDGE, from the French perdrix, which, with the intrusion 
of a “r,” comes from the Latin perdix—a word probably imitative 
of the cock bird’s call. . 

Quan, lit. ‘the quacker.” A contraction of Low Latin 
quaquila. 

Ratu is imitative, from the Old French raller, to rattle in the 
throat. 

Coot, “‘ the shortened bird,” is a Celtic word. The Welsh 
name is cwtiar, the short-tailed hen. Cf. cut, to make short. 

CRANE is probably imitative, and connected with a root GAR, 
to call, as in garrulus. 

BusTARD is a corruption of AVISTARD = Latin avis tarda, the 
slow bird. Cf. Ostrich, which = avis struthio. 

DorrEereE., “the silly bird,’ comes from dote, to be foolish. 
Our slang word “ dotty”’ has the same origin. 

Puover, “the rain bird,’’ comes, through the French pluvier, 
from the Latin pluvarius, belonging to rain. The restlessness of 
Plovers before rain is well known. 

-Lapwine was in Middle English lappéwinké. Lappé = hledpe, 
from hledpan, “to spring,” and winké means “a twitching move- 
_ment from side to side.’”’ The connection between these mean- 
ings and the bird’s irregular mode of flight is clearly seen. The 
word does not mean “ wing-flapper.”’ 

SNIPE, at one time variously spelt Snypr or SnyrE—in allusion 
to the bird’s characteristic ‘‘ snout ”’ or bill. 

Dunuin = dunling, the little dun bird. -ling is a diminutive 
ending, and appears in gosling, duckling, starling, nestling, &c. 

Stint = the stunted bird. 

Knor is traditionally supposed to mean “ Knut’s (Canute’s) 
bird,” though for what reason it is impossible now to say. How- 
ever, this monarch had a berry (viz. the Knout-berry), so he may 
have had a bird as well. 

WHIMBREL = whimmerel, imitative of its cry. 


516 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


GUILLEMOT = gull (a Celtic word) + mouette (French), “a 
sea-mew.” 

PuFFIN probably means ‘“‘the little bird with the puffed-out 
beak.” The -in is a diminutive ending. 

GREBE, ‘“‘the crested bird,’ from the Gaelic crib, a comb 
or crest. 

FULMAR = FOULMART (the polecat), in allusion, of course, to 
the bird’s strong and persistent odour. 

PETREL, or, more correctly, PeTEREL = St. Peter’s bird— 
so called from the appearance the bird has of walking on 
the sea. 


( 517 ) 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


MAMMALIA. 


CARNIVORA. 


Marten in Cleveland.—On the 9th of February last an example of 
the Marten (Mustela martes) was trapped at Swainby-in-Cleveland, on the 
estate of my friend Mr. E. B. Emerson. Mr. Emerson’s keeper informs 
me that it was caught in a Weasel-trap set in the hollow space of a double 
wall, on the edge of the moor, at the top of the valley known as Scugdale. 
It was alive when found, and was held by one leg that was badly bruised. 
The animal was placed in a Ferret-box, and feigned death while the keeper 
was present, but when no one was near it became alert, and looked around 
as if to find a way for escape; on the reappearance of the keeper it again 
*‘ played ’possum.” The next day it died from the effects of the injuries it 
received while in the trap, and Mr. Emerson has had it preserved by 
Mussell, of Middlesborough, who tells me it is an old male. It is difficult 
to account for the occurrence of this rare animal in Cleveland, a district so 
far removed from its last stronghold, although one well suited to its habits. 
T. H. Netson (The Cliffe, Redcar). 


_ Albino Stoat in Lincolnshire.—A pure albino Stoat (Mustela erminea) 
was caught in Lincolnshire in September. Even the tag at end of the 
tail was pure white; eyes pink. I consider this a most rare variety, and 
am glad to have been able to add it to my variety collection.—J. WHITAKER 
(Rainworth, Notts). 

RODENTIA. 


Black Rat in Forfarshire.—While fishing last month on tbe North 
Ksk, I picked up a specimen of the old English Black Rat (Mus rattus), 
deposited apparently on the bank by a recent flood. A keeper who was 
with me at the time informed me that, although they used to be more 
common, this was the first he had seen for about fourteen years. I may 
add that it was on the Forfarshire bank, near North Water Bridge.—A. H. 
Barine (The Grange, Alresford, Hants). 


CETACEA. 


The Lesser Rorqual in the Essex Blackwater.—On the afternoon of 
Sept. 23rd young Mr. George Cardnell was out in his small punt, when he 


518 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


saw a large animal, that he at first thought was a Sturgeon, in shallow 
water at the head of Mayland Creek, between Canney and Steeple Hall. He 
very pluckily attacked it, drove it on the saltings, and disabled it by means | 
of a piece of old gaspipe that he had with him. He then fetched his father, 
Mr. Edmund Cardnell ; they had then considerable difficulty in despatching 
it with large butcher’s knives. I went to inspect the specimen while it was 
being cut up for manure by Mr. Nix, of Steeple Hall, and found it to be a 
young female Lesser Rorqual (Balenoptera rostrata). It measured just 
under 17 ft. in length, was black above, but paler on its ventral surface; the 
baleen was short, and with the bristly fringe was pale in colour. The flukes 
measured 6 ft. 3 in. across, and 1 ft. 2 in. wide in their widest part. The 
flippers, 27 in. by 6 in., were of a beautiful enamel whiteness on their 
central surface, but dark at each end. The head was 4 ft. in length, the 
lower jaws measuring 2 ft.6 in. I also measured the gut, resembling a 
two-inch hose, for over twenty-four yards, and then did not get to the end. 
Mr. Nix estimated the carcase to weigh over two tons, as it was more than 
a load for two strong horses to drag.—EHpwarp A. Frou (Maldon, Essex). 


AVES. 


Occurrence of the Melodious Warbler in Sussex.—On the 10th of 
May last an example of Hypolais polyglotta (Vieill.) was shot near Ninfield, 
and sent, together with some other birds, to Mr. George Bristow, Jun. I 
had the satisfaction of seeing the bird in the flesh, and I at once suspected 
its identity. On taking Dr. Ernst Hartert to view the specimen, he agreed 
with me in referring it to this species, and was able to match it with 
examples of H. polyglotta from the South of France. Mr. Howard 
Saunders also has examined the bird, and is satisfied that it is rightly 
identified, It proved on dissection to be a male. As pointed out by Mr. 
Saunders (‘ The Ibis,’ 1897, p. 628), the Melodious Warbler may be dis- 
tinguished from the Icterine Warbler (H. icterina) by being somewhat 
smaller, by the distinctly larger bastard-primary, the relatively shorter 
wing, and by the second quill being shorter than the fifth, the reverse being 
the case with the latter species. The present forms the second record of 
the undoubted occurrence of the Melodious Warbler in Britain. — W. 
Ruskin ButTERFIELD (4, Stanhope Place, St. Leonards-on-Sea). 


The Sardinian Warbler.—To avoid possible confusion in the future, 
it may be well to point out that the proper name for the ‘“ Sardinian 
Warbler” (ante, p. 450), which is common at Gibraltar, is Sylvia melano- 
cephala. I do not find the true Sylvia sarda, now known as Melizophilus 
sardus (Marm.), Marmora’s Warbler, included in Col. Irby’s ‘ Ornithology 
of the Straits of Gibraltar. —O. V. APLIN. 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 519 


[It is of course impossible to maintain a perfect uniformity in nomen- 
clature in these pages. ‘This is quite apparent even in the writings of the 
British ornithologists who contribute to ‘The Zoologist.’ We endeavour 
as far as possible, without unduly interfering with the views of our con- 
tributors, to conform the avian nomenclature with that of Mr. Howard 
Saunders for Britain, and with that of Mr. H. E. Dresser for the Conti- 
nental or ‘‘ Western Palearctic Region.” Surgeon Hurlstone Jones, the 
writer of the paper to which Mr. Aplin’s criticism is applied, is now serving 
on the China Station, and could not be consulted on the point. The two 
names were therefore printed as in the MS., the popular name ‘“ Sardinian 
Warbler ” being considered as sufficient to prevent any misunderstanding. 
—~-Eip. | 


Nesting of the Common Sparrow (Passer domesticus).— In the 
September issue of ‘The Zoologist’ (ante, p. 424), Mr. J. Steele-Elhott 
remarks :—“ Yarrell points out that the Sparrow may occasionally be seen 
in winter carrying materials to the holes they inhabit; this is evidently 
only for sleeping accommodation.” I hardly think Yarrell’s actual remarks 
convey the idea that nesting material collected in winter is intended only 
for sleeping accommodation, and, as a matter of fact, it is not. In large 
factories and workshops where there is a sufficient warmth the Sparrow 
nests amongst the rafters all the year round. I remember one instance 
where, in a large engineering works, I found a young naked Sparrow at the 
end of January which had fallen on to a bench from a nest in the roofing. 
It is astonishing what apparent stupidity and ingenuity are combined in the 
construction of some of these nests. In a large warehouse in Glasgow, 
where bolts and nuts were being packed, I used to notice many Sparrows’ 
nests on the wooden horizontal tie-beams. Sometimes the whole mass of 
rubbish would tumble off on to the floor, when another nest would be im- 
mediately commenced in the same place. In one case, however, I found 
that the birds had securely anchored their nest by actually winding seven 
or eight strings right round the beam, which was nine inches deep, and 
weaving their nesting materials into them. In this particular nest neither 
hay nor straws were used. It was a large mass consisting entirely of 
strings drawn from the packing-bags, cotton-waste, and feathers. Roughly 
speaking, it was about fourteen inches diameter, and eight inches deep, 
open at the top, where the eggs were laid in a small cup-shaped hollow about 
three inches diameter.— Ropertr H. Reav (Bedford Park, Chiswick, W.). 


Rooks in London.—A new colony of Corvus frugilegus in London in 
the year 1900 deserves to be recorded in ‘ The Zoologist.’ During the 
early winter months I often observed one or two Rooks about the open space 
in Hyde Park, where the Great Exhibition stood between the Serpentine 


520 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


and the high road to Kensington. I never saw them except in the early 
morning, and where they spent the remainder of the day I do not know. 
On March 28th I noticed that a pair of Rooks had completed a nest ina 
plane-tree in the Park close to the lodge at Prince of Wales’s Gate. In the 
same tree there were some remains of an old nest, which had, I think, been 
occupied by a solitary pair some years ago. On April 6th a second nest 
was begun close to the first, but so far I never saw more than a pair of 
Rooks. Early in the morning of April 13th I saw five Rooks busy about 
the nests, but the second nest was not completed. I was away from 
London till April 26th; when, on my return, I hastened to see how the 
rookery was progressing, and found the original nest near the lodge was quite 
demolished, but the second one was still remaining. Across the Kensington 
Road, in the yard or garden of Kingston House, a large and flourishing 
settlement had sprung into existence. There were seven nests in a large 
elm-tree, and two in a plane-tree just beyond it. In Hyde Park there was 
a new nest in an elm-tree opposite 18, Prince’s Gate. The second nest near 
the lodge was completed, and altogether there were ten nests, all occupied, 
as far as one could discover from below. The birds were all about the nests, 
and a most melodious chorus rejoiced my ears. So far as I can discover, 
there is no record of arookery at Kingston House in former years. In May 
I visited Connaught Square, and counted twelve nests in the plane-trees 
there. The rookery in Connaught Square was deserted in the season of 
1899.—Harotp Russet (2, Temple Gardens, London). 


Number of Eggs in the Nest of Swift. —With reference to the note on 
the number of Swift’s eggs in last month’s ‘ Zoologist’ (ante, p. 479), I can 
fully confirm Mr. Steele-Hlliott’s statement as to there being at times, and 
by no means infrequently, three eggs in a nest of Cypselus apus. I had some 
correspondence with Mr. Howard Saunders on the subject, and my notes 
appeared in my yearly natural history notes in ‘The Zoologist’ for 1898. 
I have found three eggs in a Swift’s nest that was isolated, some miles from 
any other, so that there was no chance of two hens laying in the same nest. 
“Other places, other manners,” you know.—OxLEY GRABHAM (Thornton 


Dale, Pickering). 


Cuckoo’s Egg in Song-Thrush’s Nest.—On July 1st of this year I 
met a friend at Richmond who told me that a Song-Thrush had nested in a 
bush just beside his garden-door, and laid four or five eggs, but that it had 
deserted, and a Sparrow or some such bird had laid in the nest. I walked 
home with him, and examined the nest. It was an ordinary Song-Thrush’s 
nest, built in a laurustinus-bush in the garden, a few feet away from the side- 
door, and contained three eggs of the Thrush and one egg of a Cuckoo. 
The nest and eggs were very wet and deserted. My friend told me it had 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 521 


contained four or five Thrush’s eggs originally ; so that, as is generally the 
case, one or two eggs had evidently been turned out by the Cuckoo when 
depésiting itsown. This is the only egg of Cuculus canorus I have ever 
met with in a Song-Thrush’s nest, and is at the same time the largest and 
heaviest. The weight was 62°5 grains; average weight of Song-Thrush’s 
eggs, 104 grains. The smallest Cuckoo’s egg I have ever found was ina 
Sedge-Warbler’s nest, and weighed 37 grains; average weight of Sedge- 
Warbler’s eggs, 22 grains. The usual weight of a Cuckoo's egg is about 
48 grains.—Rospert H. Ruap (Bedford Park, Chiswick, W.). 


Partridges in Nottinghamshire.—Partridges vary very much in num- 
bers in Notts; this season on the sands they only represent a fair year, but 
‘on the heavy lands they are better, and in large coveys. Notts is becoming 
one of the very best counties for Perdia cinerea, and very big bags are in good 
seasons made, and though in years gone by shooting over dogs and walking 
in line we considered forty to sixty brace a good day, now with driving and 
turning out Hungarian birds we get 150 to 250 brace, and do not think 
very much of anything under one hundred brace.—J. WHITAKER (Rain- 
worth, Notts). | 


Pectoral Sandpiper at Aldeburgh.—I bagged a Pectoral Sandpiper 
(Tringa maculata) at Aldeburgh on Sept. 13th. I flushed it froma tussock 
- in the Thorpe mere. It looked darker and a bit larger than a Dunlin, 
uttered a somewhat harsh double note, and flew more like a Snipe. The 
wind was north-east at the time.—E. C. Arnoip (The Close, Winchester). 


Great Skua (Megalestris catarrhactes) in Kent.—A female Great 
Skua was shot on Oct. 4th near the post-office at Dungeness by Mr. G. 
Bates, and forwarded to me in the flesh. It has been carefully mounted by 
Mr. Bristow, and may now be seen in the bird collection at the Hastings 
Museum. — W. Ruskin Burrerrietp (4, Stanhope Place, St. Leonards- 
on-Sea). 


Levantine Shearwaters at Scarborough. — On Sept. 13th I had 
brought to be preserved an immature specimen of Puffinus yelkouanus, 
which had been shot in the South Bay here upon that date. It is a bird of 
the year (a female), and its identity has been confirmed by Mr. Howard 
Saunders, who has examined the specimen. This is not the first occurrence 
of this species at Scarborough, an adult male, which was identified by 
Dr. R. Bowdler Sharpe, being killed here on Feb. 4th, 1899, although its 
occurrences pon our coasts are, I believe, of extreme rarity. —W. J. 
CxiarkE (44, Huntriss Row, Scarborough). 


Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., November, i900. 2N 


522 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 


Life and Letters of Thomas Henry Hualey. By his Son, 
Lronarp Huxuey. 2 vols. Macmillan & Co., Limited. 


Many, very many, of us who are now growing grey will recall 
the days of early manhood when the voice of Huxley was regarded 
as that of a prophet both in science and philosophy. How the 
great lights of those days have disappeared! Mill, Carlyle, 
Darwin, Renan, Tennyson, and Huxley have vanished. We can 
almost remember the exact circumstances of our hives when each 
passed away, so profound was the impression created. Younger 
men see fresh constellations and rising stars, but we find the 
firmament growing darker as these planets fade; the days seem 
growing shorter, and the nights longer; the ocean to be encroach- 
ing on the shore, for the beacons are disappearing. | 

We possess Huxley’s collected writings and lectures; his cold 
and cheerless marble effigy adorns the vestibule of our great 
Natural History Museum; but of the man himself little was 
known to most of his readers. He was too generally appreciated 
as only a great man of science, or a polemical writer of much 
power and wisdom. ‘These volumes come as a revelation; we 
used to read Huxley, and now we know him. 

Huxley was entrusted with a great talent, which he did not 
hide under a bushel; but even then his fight for position was a 
strenuous one, and he probably made a wise choice in adopting 
for a motto in his early days the well-known words of Danton: 
*“De Vaudace et encore de l’audace et toujours de l’audace.” 
This struggle to many would be an abomination, but to Huxley 
it was a necessity; he was intellectually a gladiator, and it is 
probable that the arena developed his immense polemical powers, 
which rested on a sure and certain knowledge in continuous culti- 
vation. As we read these pages we are in doubt as to which 
created or supplemented the other. Great as was the original 
work he did in zoology, we can never forget the philosophical 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 523 


spell he cast over it, and to the reading public he is rather better 
know as the daring philosopher and metaphysician than by his 
biological discoveries. As an anthropologist and zoologist, he is 
appreciated by that small inner circle of scientific workers whose 
opinion alone carries any weight on these subjects ; to the world 
at large, whose verdict is not worth too much, he is the successful 
foe of shams and quackeries. 

Among the most interesting points in these interesting volumes 
are Huxley’s opinions of other zoologists. He soon found 
out on board the ‘ Rattlesnake’ that Macgillivray was not the 
*‘ignoramus in natural history ”’ he had been told, and was at any 
rate ‘‘ a very good ornithologist,” and a zealous collector ; William 
Macleay made a good: impression, and was described in 1848 as 
“the celebrated propounder of the Quinary system.’ Owen “is 
an able man, but to my mind not so great as he thinks himself, 
He can only work in the concrete from bone to bone ; in abstract 
reasoning he becomes lost—witness ‘ Parthenogenesis.’”? The 
reference to the late Dr. Gray is delightful. ‘‘ The dog-fox’s 
cecum is so different from the vixen’s that Gray would have 
made distinct genera of them.” But in a more judicial phraseology 
is the well-balanced verdict on his old friend Darwin: “Iam not 
likely to take a low view of Darwin’s position in the history of 
science, but I am disposed to think that Buffon and Lamarck 
would run him hard in both genius and fertility. In breadth of 
view and in extent of knowledge these two men were giants, 
though we are apt to forget their services. Von Bar was another 
man of the same stamp; Cuvier, in a somewhat lower rank, 
another; and J. Miiller another.” 

This biography almost constitutes an abstract of the intel- 
lectual progress made during a recent fifty years, in which zoology 
plays a prominent part. Huxley had considerable sympathy 
with much that he severely criticised, and his attacks seemed 
often more severe because he kept in touch with the progress of 
the opinions he opposed. To the superficial he was a declared 
enemy, and they could not realise that far below the surface there 
may be much community of thought. His published letters now 
give a clue to this enigma. 

And now we come to the most important consideration, the 
relation of Huxley the evolutionist, to Darwinism. In future 


524 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


years, when this period will be alike termed the Victorian age and 
the Darwinian era, how will he be associated with this great 
conception? Was Huxley the Baptist or the Paul to Dar- 
winism ? In the light of these volumes we consider him both. 


A Treatise on Zoology. Kdited by E. Ray Lanxesrer, M.A., 
LL.D., F.R.S., &. Part IJ. The Porifera and Coelentera, 
by EK. A. Mincuin, M.A., G. Herspert Fowrer, B.A., 
Ph.D., and Gingert C. Bournr, M.A. With an Intro- 
duction by E. Ray Lanxester. Adam & Charles Black. 


THE second volume has now appeared of this advanced well- 
named ‘ Treatise.’ Vol. III., which appeared first, has already 
been noticed in these pages, and the present volume very fully 
maintains the excellence of the Oxford publication. 

The Editor contributes an introduction on a subject of great 
biological importance, viz. the celom, a: name proposed by 
Haeckel for the cavity in Vertebrate animals often called the 
*‘ pleuroperitoneal cavity.” This isa branch of technical biology 
of the profoundest interest, but one necessarily little discussed 
in our bionomic pages. This “introduction ’”’ can, however, be 
consulted as the last word in the investigation to date, and, as its 
writer has proposed, it is ‘‘the vindication of the ccelom as a 
morphological factor of primary importance in the animal series, 
and the maintenance of the conclusion that the celom by its 
presence justifies the separation of a higher grade of Enterozoa, 
the Coelomoceela, from a lower grade, the Enteroccela, in which it 
is not differentiated as a separate cavity.” 

Prof. Minchin has written very fully on the Sponges. These 
creatures afford their evolutionary evidence, as do all other 
animals. ‘‘ Many deep-sea sponges, especially those of the 
order Monaxonida, are to be regarded as having migrated down- 
wards from the shore-line in comparatively recent times, and in 
such forms the influence of life in still water is seen in a great 
regularity of growth, resulting in the development of a secondary 
symmetry.” The colours of Sponges are very varied, and often 
very bright; but Prof. Minchin states that green is a rare colour 
among marine Sponges, though it is the usual tint of the fresh- 
water Spongilling, where, however, it is due to chlorophyll, 


NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS. 525 


Dr. G. Herbert Fowler contributes the sections Hydromeduse 
and Scyphomeduse, organisms which were recently grouped to- 
gether under the name of Hydrozoa. This portion of the work 
is distinctly of a character that does not adapt itself to quotation 
in ‘ The Zoologist,’ though in a biological sense it is none the less 
valuable on that account. 

The Anthozoa have been entrusted to the care of Mr. G. C. 
Bourne. The true nature of Corals and Gorgonians was first 
discovered by the observational method, and was accomplished by 
Peyssonel, of Marseilles, “‘ who made a number of observations 
on Corals on the coast of Barbary, and kept several forms alive 
in aquaria.” We are reminded of the old, old story, when we 
read that ‘‘ Peyssonel’s observations were laid before the Academy 
of Sciences of France in 1727, but his views were strongly opposed 
by Réaumur, whose authority was sufficient to condemn them.” 

A most welcome feature of this volume is the adoption of the 
historical method. Terms are traced to their proposers; the men 
who first extended the boundaries of knowledge are brought in 
line with the more advanced workers of to-day, and in the appre- 
ciation of present results the pioneers of the past are not for- 
gotten. The evolutionary principle is emphasized on every page, 
without the reiteration of personal theories, or the infliction of 
complicated terms which lack definition and reflect too frequently 
only personalopinion. Whilst the work of Haeckel is recognised, 
we know that the true evolutionary spirit is present. 

Another excellent departure is the provision of an index at 
the end of each section, and this in the day when the Bible and 
Shakspeare are still published without that necessary adjunct. 


Origin and Character of the British People. By Norriper 
CHARLES Macnamara. Smith, Elder & Co. 


Ir is no disrespect to this book to regard it largely as a very 
useful compilation. Of course any attempt to discuss the origin 
of the British or any other people can scarcely be divorced from 
the question of the derivation of Man himself. Mr. Macnamara 
does not shirk this responsibility. He is convinced ‘that no 
animal whose skull is ossified according to the method which 


526 THE ZO0O0OLOGIST. 


prevails among apes could possibly acquire an _ intellectual 
capacity such as that possessed by man. The genus Homo 
differs from the anthropoid apes in that his skull possesses an 
innate power of growth, especially in its anterior part, which 
permits full development of the anterior lobes of his brain, and 
thus of his intellectual capacity and speech.” He adopts the 
view enunciated in this country by Prof. Boyd Dawkins, and 
considers the Eskimos as ‘‘ pure descendants of the glacial 
inhabitants of Europe”’; nor does he hesitate to write of ‘“‘the 
men living in Europe before and during the glacial period.” Of 
the pre-glacial existence of man, we are reminded of a special 
anthropological discussion on this subject, held in London some 
years ago, at which the President, Sir John Evans, advised the 
attitude of ‘‘ Caution, caution, caution.” The racial origin of the 
people of England is accepted by Mr. Macnamara as ‘‘ formed by 
the Iberian stock, who, until the mid-neolithic period, were the 
only human inhabitants of our island’’; and the Iberian race is 
elsewhere defined as ‘‘ the people who were directly descended from 
the aborigines of Northern Africa and Western Europe.” Scot- 
land, Wales, and Ireland have distinct summaries, and the volume 
is another evidence of the intelligent interest taken by the reading 
public in the fascinating study of British Anthropology. 


( 527 ) 


EDITORIAL GLEANINGS. 


THE recent Meeting of the British Association at Bradford, as usual, 
provided thought for the zoologist. Section D—Zoology—was presided 
over by Dr. Ramsay H. Traquair, and his address was devoted to the 
teachings of Palzontology, particulariy as referring to fossil ichthyology. 
Dr. Traquair emphasized the necessary position of Palzontology in the 
domain of Biology, and pertinently remarked :—“ As I have asked on a 
previous occasion, ‘ Does an animal cease to be an animal because it is pre- 
served in stone instead of spirits? Is a skeleton any the less a skeleton 
because it has been excavated from the rock, instead of prepared in a 
macerating trough?’ And I may now add—Do animals, because they 
have been extinct for it may be millions of years, thereby give up their 
‘place in the great chain of organic being, or do they cease to be of any im- 
portance to the evolutionist because their soft tissues, now no longer existing, 
cannot be imbedded in paraffin, and cut with a Cambridge microtome ?” 


In this Section, Mr. Borchgrevink read a most interesting paper on the 
results obtained by the British Antarctic Expedition, organised by Sir 
George Newnes. On the coast of Victoria Land, and on an island which 
was discovered and named Duke of York Island, the Penguins literally 
covered the ground, their nests lying on the top of the guano deposits, and 
consisting of pebbles. From Oct. 15th one continual stream of Penguins 
waddled over the ice towards their summer residence ; like so many people, 
they walked after one another. On sunny days the male bird stood erect 
in the old nest, his beak towards the zenith, and, while he moved his flip- 
pers backwards and forwards, he produced a hoarse suffocating sound. 
The female listened attentively to this antarctic love-song. 

It was curious to see how some lazy Penguins picked those pebbles, 
which, through the care and work of years, had successfully been accumu- 
lated by one, when this one happened to turn his back; and the evident 
unconcern and innocent behaviour of these scoundrels when caught in the 
act was a source of great amusement. The rightful proprietor of the 
pebbles would pursue the culprit most energetically, running after it and 
hitting it with its flippers until both were quite exhausted and covered with 
blood. During these fights they generally seemed to remember the cause of 
the quarrel, but it was noticed that as a rule the one who first gave in walked 
off with the pebble, while the victorious one, blinded by success, was left 


528 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


with the honour. Generally they lay two eggs; very seldom are three 
found in one nest. Both male and female divide their time on the eggs for 
a month. In the summer of 1899 they sat from the beginning of November 
to the beginning of December. When the mother Penguin feeds the young 
one, the latter puts the whole of its head into the beak of its parent, and 
stuffs its beak right into the mother’s throat, which by a shaking movement 
brings the food up. It was curious to see when a gale suddenly surprised 
the colony; they all lay down with their beaks to the south-east, from 
which direction came the strongest gales. They looked like soldiers 
bivouacking on a battle-field. 


Tue following extract recently appeared in the ‘ Standard,’ creating 
some sensation among the other daily papers, and showing the drift of public 
interest in scientific theories as now recognized by journalism :— 

** At the recent Congress of German anthropologists at Halle, Professor 
Klaatsch, of Heidelberg, read a paper on ‘ The Significance of the Bicephalous 
Muscle of the Upper Part of the Thigh,’ in the course of which he argued 
that ‘the hypothesis of the direct descent of man from Apes can no longer 
be maintained.’ He based his belief on the following grounds: Man 
possesses a muscle on the upper part of the thigh, one strand of which pro- 
ceeds from the pelvis, while the other, which is free and supplied with a 
special nerve, proceeds from the upper part of the thigh, and is attached to 
the fibula. After several years’ investigation, Prof. Klaatsch came to the 
conclusion that the so-called ‘ short strand’ is a rudimentary form of the 
biceps muscle, which is much more frequently found in mammals than has 
hitherto been assumed. Marsupials, Carnivora, many Rodents, and some 
American Monkeys have been found by the Professor to possess a thick 
ribbon-like muscle, supplied with the same nerve as the ‘short strand.’ 

‘“A whole family of mammals appears to have possessed this muscle to 
a very large extent, and it is only in man, anthropoid Apes, and American . 
prehensile-tailed Monkeys that it has been modified to the ‘ short strand ’ of 
the biceps muscle. It was originally supposed that the erect walking gait 
of once climbing animals was connected with this muscle modification. 
Many such climbing mammals, however, as well as all the Lemurs, &c., of 
the Old World, have completely lost the muscie, so that its preservation in 
the case of certain primates and man must be due to some other cause. ‘This 
cause is made apparent on an examination of the forms of man and the 
higher primates, whose limbs more closely resemble the original mammalian 
form than is the case with the majority of other animals. The supposition 
therefore of a direct descent of man from the Ape is no longer tenable. The 
now existing Apes are for the most part degenerate forms. The connection 
of man and Apes is to be sought at the root of the common family tree.” 


pow LGOOLOGIST 


No. 714.—December, 1900. 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH AND THE 
NEIGHBOURHOOD. 


By Arruur PATTERSON. 


(Continued from p. 415.) 


Bernicla leucopsis. |Bernacle-Goose. — R. Recorded by 
Messrs. Paget as “‘not uncommon.” At present a very uncertain 
visitor, several years elapsing without an example. Three on 
Breydon, June 13th, 1890; one also Jan. 19th, 1896. Three 
shot out of a flock of ten, Dec. 21st, 1899. 

B. brenta. Brent Goose.—N.U. In severe winters, during 
continuous snowstorms, common at times in the roadstead. Very 
humerous on beach and Breydon, January and February, 1881. 
A flock on Breydon during south-east wind, Feb. 7th, 1897. Two 
hanging on Durrant’s stall, Feb. 8th, 1899, locally shot, were 
conspicuous by their difference in size. I have observed this 
disparity before. Local, ‘‘ Scotch Goose.” 

Cygnus musicus. Whooper.—F. On approach of severe 
weather small flocks pass over, and in protracted frosts frequent 
Breydon. Several examples in some seasons brought to market, 
usually in January. On Jan. 11th, 1879, I saw two flocks on 
Breydon relatively numbering twenty-one and thirty-two. On 
March 8th, 1891, twelve seen; and May 29th of same year, 
four more. 

C. bewicki. Bewick’s Swan.—F. Occurring under similar 

Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., December, 1900. 20 


530 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


conditions to the preceding. Occasionally three or four are 
brought to market during winter, which seldom passes without 
any. Five shot and eight others seen, Jan. lst, 1893. Several 
odd birds since. 

C.immutabilis. Polish Swan.—R. I have observed three or 
four examples of this species or variety in the market, noting the 
green lines down the toes, the web of the foot being black. 
Three hung on a game-stall in the market on Oct. 24th, 1890. 
An example shot on Breydon, Jan. 20th, 1897. Mr. Southwell 
tells me that in the many hundreds of cygnets which have been 
received at the Norwich swan-pit, not one example in the white 
down, which is peculiar to the Polish Swan, has ever been met 
with. [Stray Mute Swans of various ages are not infrequently 
shot. Five were killed in two shots on Breydon, Oct. 25th, 1881.] 

Tadorna cornuta. Sheld-duck.—F. A few pairs nest on the 
North Norfolk coast. During a severe rime-frost in the winter 
of 1879 an unusual number passed along the beach southward, 
almost within arm’s length. Frequent on Breydon in spring, 
where it hunts for Mollusca amongst the Potamogeton. It affects 
the water much less than others of the Anatide. Seventeen on 
Breydon, Jan. 13th, 1897, twelve of which I saw hanging on 
Durrant’s stall on the 16th. Local, ‘‘ Bergander.” 

T’. casarca. Huddy Sheld-duck.—A. ‘“ On Aug. 18th, 1898, 
an adult female, quite perfect in plumage, believed to have been 
shot near Yarmouth, was sent to Mr. Cole for preservation for 
Mr. Connop’s collection”? (Nor. N.S.). 

Anas boscas. Mallard.—C. Since the Preservation Acts has 
certainly become somewhat more plentiful, although local gun- 
ners are wroth because the landed proprietors make sure of many 
flappers even before the close-season ends. Frequently crosses 
with domestic Ducks on the marshes. A cart-load on a game- 
stall, Feb. 26th, 1881. 

A. strepera. Gadwall.—R. ‘Two or three generally shot 
every year on Breydon”’ (Pagets). Itis not the casenow. ‘Three 
shot on Breydon, September, 1881, and afterwards hung up at 
Thomas’s shop, were apparently all immature. 

Spatula clypeata. Shoveler.—F. An increasing number nest 
on the Broads, and young birds are occasionally brought to market 
in autumn. ‘Those shot in winter are doubtless immigrants. This 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 5381 


€ 

Duck is uncommonly good eating, a friend comparing the flesh 
to‘that of the American Canvas-back. Under date, May 26th, 
1818, Whitear refers, in his diary, to fifty-six eggs “this spring” 
being found by one man in the Winterton marshes (Nor. N.S. 
vol. iii. p. 247). Several lots seen on Breydon, August, 1881. 
(B. of 8.). Sixty-five observed on Breydon, March 5th, 1890. 
Local, “ Shovel-bill,”’ ‘‘ Spoonbill-duck.” 

Dajfila acuta. Pintail Duck.—R.R. In January, the local 
*‘duck month” par excellence, if severe weather obtains, several 
may be brought to market. Several at Yarmouth, February, 
1892. 

Querquedula crecca. Teal.—L.L. Nests on the Broads. 
* Common; Mr. Girdlestone shot the young bird at Hickling, in 
July”? (Paget). Small flocks of migrants on Breydon in the 
winter, and several in the market generally, although not so 
frequent as formerly. In 1891 Mr. Lowne received a variety 
with a thin white line or collar round the neck from Saxmundham. 
Number on Breydon, March 9th, 1898. 

Q. circia. Garganey.—R.R. ‘‘ Not uncommon, and occa- 
sionally breeding”’ (Pagets, quoting Girdlestone). A spring 
visitor nesting on the Broads, but, I fear, in decreasing numbers. 
It seems to be giving way to the Shovelers. 

Mareca penelope. Wigeon.—C. Large flocks often visit 
Breydon during the spring migration ; numbers also at the com- 
mencement of wintry season. Common also on the Broads 
during severe weather. On March 12th, 1888, five hundred 
Wigeon on Breydon; also three Pintails, two Whoopers, and 
one Scoter. March 16th, 1889, five thousand on Breydon. 
Local, ‘‘ Smee.” 

Fuligula ferina. Pochard.—C. A common visitor in winter, 
the severer the weather the greater the numbers. I saw a “‘ flap- 
per,” with the plumage of its wings quite stumpy, on sale, July 
15th, 1880. Local, ‘‘ Poker” and ‘‘ Dunbird.” 

F. rufina. Red-crested Pochard.—A. The first recorded 
British specimen was shot. on Breydon, July, 1818. ‘Two at 
Yarmouth, 1826; and one or two others since. A female was 
shot at Hickling in December, 1867, with fifteen Common Pochards 
(B. of N. vol. iii. p. 200). 

F. nyroca. Ferruginous Duck.—R. ‘‘ Has in a very few 

202 


532 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


instances been shot on Breydon”’ (Paget). Over twenty occur- 
rences noted in the county. A male shot at Potter Heigham, 
Dec. 30th, 1866 (Connop Catalogue). Another, same locality, 
Dec. 26th, 1886; and a third (a young male) shot near Yar- 
mouth, Oct. 9th, 1894. 

F. cristata. Tufted Duck.—C. Probably on the increase. 
Numbers shot in severe weather. Local, “ Golden-eye.” 

F. marila. Scaup-Duck.— C. Sometimes abundant in 
January, during sharp weather, usually coming ahead of severe 
frosts. Twenty-three in Yarmouth market, Dec. 20th, 1890; 
between thirty and forty hanging there latter part of October, 
1898. A female, shot in October, 1898, had the crop full of 
Cyclas cornea. Female generally known as the ‘‘ White-nosed day- 
fowl.” The species also known as “ Hard-fowl,” ‘‘ Grey-backs.” 

Clangula glaucion. Golden-eye.—F.C. Common in sharp 
weather. An adult female on Fritton lake, April 6th, 1888. Adult 
males very rarely met with. Local, “ Rattle-wing.” 

C. albeola. Buffel-headed Duck.— A. An adult male shot 
at Yarmouth in 1830. Now in Norwich Museum. 

Harelda glacialis. Long-tailed Duck.—R. “Very rare; 
occasionally shot on Breydon in hard winters” (Paget). I have 
seen several immature examples. Male on Breydon, Nov. 30th, 
1898. 

Somateria mollisima. Eider Duck.— R.R. After severe 
winter gales odd birds are occasionally seen, mostly female. 
They are extremely tame in most instances, and easily shot or 
stoned. An immature male caught in a fishing-net off Yarmouth 
about November, 1859; female, Breydon, Dec. 12th, 1883; nine 
seen in one flock, Oct. 4th, 1891; female killed by a stone on 
Nov. 20th, 1897, in the surf at Hemsby ; another female swim- 
ming a few feet from my houseboat during heavy gale, Nov. 29th 
same year. 

[Messrs. Paget refer to a ‘“‘King-Hider (S. spectabilis)—a 
female, shot on Breydon, July 25th, 1813.” It is thought the 
authority is not sufficient to justify its being included in the 
county list. But three examples have been killed at Hunstanton.] 

S. stelleri. Steller’s Duck.—A. A magnificent male shot on 
the Denes near Caister, February, 1830; now in Norwich Museum 


(Nor. N.S.). 


THE BIRDS OF GREAT YARMOUTH. 583 
4 

Gidemia nigra. Common Scoter.—C. Flocks every winter 
off the coast; sometimes by hundreds. Very restless during 
snowy weather, with east winds. In ordinary weather will feed 
and drift towards the shore, occasionally flying back to some 
favourite feeding ground. Often seen in the Ham (a kind of bay), 
Gorleston. During December, 1899, millions of Mactra stultorum 
were washed ashore, mostly living. This mollusc is found an 
inch or two below the surface of the sand. On this species, no 
doubt, the Scoter delights to feed. Local, ‘‘ Mussel-duck,” 
* Black Duck.” 

O. fusca. Velvet-Scoter.—R. R. ‘‘ Occasionally shot in hard 
winters; several in the severe one of 1829-30” (Paget). The 
same description applies to-day. Mr. EK. T. Booth met with 
flocks of Velvet Scoters and Long-tailed Ducks off Yarmouth, 
February, 1882. One entangled in a herring-net off Caister, 
_ Oct. 21st, 1893. 

Mergus merganser. Goosander.—N.C. Messrs. Paget record 
it as occasionally met with here in sharp weather. A punt-gunner 
killed five, all females, Jan. 11th, 1871. Several of both sexes, 
January, 1881 (B. of S.). The crop of one killed a few years ago 
contained several small Roach. Fine adult male in the market, 
Dec. 20th, 1899, and a female equally as good near Potter 
Heigham, Dec. 21st, 1899. Local, “ Saw-bill.”’ 

M. serrator. Red-breasted Merganser.— R.R. ‘‘ Not un- 
common in hard winters; several in 1829-30” (Paget). Itisa 
very uncertain visitor; in some years several, in others none. 
Several, January, 1894. 

M. albellus. Smew.—N.U. Occasionally met with in severe 
winters in varying numbers. A good old male now and again 
shot in January. On Jan. 15th, 1881, a curiously mottled male, 
which had more than half assumed the white garb, was obtained 
on Breydon. Several in January, 1891, and in January, 1894. 
Local, ‘‘ White Nun,” “ Weasel-duck.”’ | 

[M. cucullatus. Hooded Merganser.—A. Messrs. Paget state 
that one of these birds was killed in the winter of 1829, ‘‘ which 
Mr. Selby has’’; but subsequent enquiries have failed to sub- 
stantiate the record, or trace the specimen.] 

Columba palumbus. Wood-Pigeon.—C. Huge flocks occa- 
sionally pass over from the north-east at the autumnal migratory 


534 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


period, as was the case on Dec. 22nd and 23rd, 1893, when 
thousands arrived, and the market was glutted. Thousands 
again coming over, Dec. 12th, 1898. They must have flown 
westward, as none appeared in the following Saturday’s market. 
Local, “‘ Ring-dow.” 

C. enas. Stock-Dove.—F.C. Messrs. Paget in their time 
stated that it was “rarely seen.’’ Now it arrives occasionally in 
some numbers in early spring, nesting in the county. Prior to 
the railway running across the North Denes (up to 1879) num- 
bers came there at * haysel,’”’ seeking the juicy seeds of the sea- 
bindweed (Convolvulus soldanella). April 13th, 1895, saw thirteen 
in the market ; Aug. 29th, 1896, six; Jan. 13th, 1898, ten, which 
had been baited with maize. Heavy bird in the market, Dec. 9th, 
1899, weighing 153 oz. 

Turtur communis. Turtle-Dove.—C. Decidedly on the 
increase. ‘The Pagets recorded it as “rarely seen”; and Lub- 
bock states that, although formerly but an occasional migrant, it 
had in 1845 become generally distributed. It nests at Fritton. 
Formerly often seen on North Denes. 

Syrrhaptes paradoxus. Pallas’s Sand-Grouse.—A. During 
the invasion of this species in 1863 (when sixty were killed in 
Norfolk), several were obtained here. The North Denes and 
sand-hills were most frequented. The first Norfolk bird was 
found dead in the surf on May 23rd. A gunner named Nudd, on 
June 6th, shot a male out of a flock of nine. He mistook them 
for Plover, but described them to me as ‘‘running about like 
Rats.”” On May 27th, 1876, a flock was observed on the Winter- 
ton sand-bills; and in May, 1888, a second invasion occurred, 
when over eleven hundred were seen in Norfolk, and one hundred 
and eighty-six were killed. A male and female were seen on the 
Denes as late as Dec. 2nd (vide Stevenson’s ‘ Birds of Norfolk,’ 
vol. i. pp. 376-404 ; also vol. il. pp. 892-396). | 

Phasianus colchicus. Pheasant.—C. And likely to remain so 
under existing conditions. Belated birds have occasionally been 
seen in the heart of the town. 

Perdix cinerea. Common Partridge. — C. The curious 
chestnut variety, which has received the name of P. montana, has 
not yet been obtained in the Yarmouth district. 

Caccabis rufa. Red-legged Partridge.—C. Before the North 


THE BIRDS OF GRHAT YARMOUTH. 535 


Denes were encroached upon, not seldom nested among the furze. 
I have seen exhausted birds in spring run down on the Denes, and 
in the town itself. Lubbock refers to similar occurrences, and of 
the attempts to leave our shores; but Mr. Southwell (2nd edit. 
‘Fauna of Norfolk,’ p. 71) thinks this rather ‘‘ indicative of its 
wandering habits than of migratory instinct.” Local, ‘“‘ French 
Partridge.” 

Coturnix communis. Quail. — N.C. ‘Not uncommon” 
(Paget). Lubbock noted a decrease in numbers in his time. In 
this district it is now seldom seen or shot. A female example 
shot at Scratby, Sept. 13th, 1893. Two in the market, 
Nov. 18th, 1899. 

Crex pratensis. Land-Rail.—-C. Some captures in queer 
places made almost every autumn in the town. Of late years it 
appears to have been considerably on the increase. Several at 
one time sometimes hanging in the market. 

Porzana maruetia. Spotted Crake.—N.C. ‘* Not uncom- 
mon at Belton, &c.” (Paget). May now occasionally nest on 
the Broads. Not so common as formerly. Several met with in 
September, 1881. Two hanging in the market, Dec. 13th, 1899. 

P. parva. Little Crake.—R. Several recorded for district 
first half of the century. ‘ Two were shot by Mr. Richers near 
Yarmouth, March, 1888. . . . One was preserved by Harvey, of 
Yarmouth, and sold for fifty shillings ” (B. of N. vol. 11. p. 398). 
I havea pencil note of Harvey’s on the margin of Messrs. Pagets’ 
‘Sketch,’ remarking, ‘“‘ Very rare, but has been met with.” 

P. bailloni. Baillon’s Crake.—R. ‘Two nests believed to be 
of this species found at Potter Heigham, June and July, 1866 
(Nor. N.8.). Nest, same locality, June 9th, 1886. 

Rallus aquaticus. Water-Rail.— C. This species is still 
fairly abundant with us. A number are shot in severe weather, 
and appear in the market. ‘In 1883 upwards of two hundred 
eggs were received by one dealer from Yarmouth, others being 
supplied as well—a traffic much to be regretted” (Howard 
Saunders, ‘Manual,’ 1st edit. 1889). I have seen many of its 
eggs brought to market. 

Gallinula chloropus. Moor-hen.— C. Abundant on the 


Broads and marsh-lands. 
(To be continued.) 


536 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


CONSCIOUS PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 
By Guy A. K. Marswatu, F.Z.S8. 


In the second portion of his ‘ Biological Suggestions’’ (Zool. 
(1899) pp. 289, 841, 448, 529; (1900) p. 116), Mr. Distant has dealt 
at some length with the phenomena of animal colouration, generally 
described under the terms of Protective and Aggressive Resemblance. 
It is not altogether obvious why these phenomena should have been 
ranked by him under the term Mimicry. Iam aware that this latter 
word, as first used by Kirby and Spence at the beginning of the 
century, included all cases of resemblance of what kind soever; but 
seeing that, with our increasing knowledge of the subject, students of 
animal colouration have found it both useful and advisable to dis- 
criminate between resemblance in order to attract attention (Mimicry) 
and resemblance in order to obtain concealment (Protective and 
Aggressive Resemblance), there seems to be no sufficient reason why 
we should revert to an earlier and less exact definition, which is only 
apt to cause confusion.’ (These numerals refer to some concluding notes 
by Prof. Poulton.) In his review of the matter, Mr. Distant has 
brought together a large number of interesting facts and observations 
bearing on the subject of general and special resemblance (a distinc- 
tion, however, which he overlooks), containing examples from all 
classes of animal life. A consideration of these facts has led him to 
offer the suggestion that ‘‘ animals of their own volition, and in their 
efforts to avoid their enemies, place themselves where possible in such 
adaptation to their surroundings, that protective resemblance and some 
forms of mimicry are due to animal intelligence, and not so entirely 
to what is generally understood as the unconscious process of natural 
selection’ (/.c. 1899, p. 465). It is proposed to designate this 
conscious action by the somewhat unsatisfactory name of “ active 
mimicry’’ ;* it seems doubtful whether any special name is really 
required for this process, but, if it be so, I would suggest that ‘‘ con- 
scious resemblance ” is more suitable and more in conformity with the 
recognised terminology.t | 


* The term ‘active’? was not invented, but adopted from Kirby and 
Spence (cf. 1899, p. 464).— Eb. 

+ “Conscious mimicry” was also a term stated to have been proposed 
by Prof. Henslow (cf. 7b. p. 465).— Eb. 


CONSCIOUS PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 587 


This ‘‘ active mimicry” is apparently regarded by Mr. Distant as 
something apart from natural selection, a separate factor in evolution, 
for he says: ‘‘If the process of natural selection was to be applied, 
according to a very frequent method, as universal, then birds arising 
from these white and prominent eggs would seem in course of time to 
be doomed to destruction. But we find nothing of the kind. Natural 
selection is here replaced by the evolution of intelligence or active 
mimicry. True, it may be argued that birds laying white eggs would 
become extinct without they had gradually acquired the intelligent or 
automatic powers of concealment through a process of natural selec- 
tion. But this is only begging the question” (l.c., 1899, p. 546). 
(The italics are my own.) Seeing that this attitude permeates the 
whole discussion, it is somewhat disconcerting to read in the concluding 
remarks that, ‘to fully understand mimicry, we must appreciate 
general animal intelligence, and then we shall probably comprehend 
how much activity has been displayed by animals seeking protection 
by adaptive and assimilative efforts. This in no’way contradicts, but 
supports, the doctrine of Natural Selection. The animal survives 
which can best hide from its enemies, and this implies that the varia- 
tions which tend to adaptive and assimilative efforts, not only succeed 
in the battle of life, but by the selective process become dominant, and 
more and more accentuated with a greater need’’ (/.c., 1900, p. 124). 
It is scarcely necessary to point out that the latter position, which is 
essentially that of those very selectionists? whose views Mr. Distant is 
combatting, is quite at variance with the former. It will therefore be 
necessary, for the purpose of this discussion, to neglect this remarkable 
contradiction. 

The whole question of conscious resemblance must necessarily 
depend upon our ideas of animal intelligence, and in the present state 
of our knowledge these are unavoidably hazy and obscure. It must be 
reeollected that our conception of mind, even in our fellow men, is 
based entirely on analogy, and thus the further we depart from the 
human type, the lower we go in the organic scale, the weaker and 
weaker must that analogy become, and the more careful must we be to 
avoid the conception that any apparently purposive actions we may 
observe in these lower organisms must be due to trains of reasoning 
such as we find in ourselves. The whole subject is, at present, merely 
hypothetical ; but, on the other hand, we must not forget that even 
our most definite scientific facts are only very high probabilities.* 


* I observe that Mr. Distant has strongly criticised (J. c., 1899, p. 361) a 
somewhat similar remark by Prof. Tyler, who says that ‘‘ Natural Science 
does not deal in demonstrations, it rests upon the doctrine of probabilities ; 
just as we have to order our whole lives upon this doctrine.” To this Mr. 


538 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


It is probable that no evolutionist would deny that there must be a 
certain measure of truth in the contention that some animals are 
capable of appreciating the protective value of their colouring ;° for, 
apart from observational evidence on the point, we should antecedently 
expect a certain amount of reasoning power in this direction according 
to the ordinary principles of evolution. The question is, however, 
whether, in the suggestions under consideration, this power has not been 
considerably over-estimated. An examination of the examples referred 
to ‘‘ active mimicry ’’ would certainly lead to this conclusion, for the 
arguments used in these instances are equally applicable to every case 
of protective or aggressive resemblance. There would be little difficulty 
in demonstrating the untenability of such a position, but this is 
unnecessary, as we are expressly warned that the suggestion of active 
mimicry must not be made too absolute, although no suggestion is 
offered as to its probable limits. 

It may, perhaps, be possible to define roughly certain limits within 
which such consciousness cannot be recognised. Resemblances have 
been aptly divided by Prof. Poulton into two categories, viz. : ‘* Special 
Resemblance, in which the appearance of a particular object is copied 
in shape and outline as well as in colour; and General Resemblance, in 
which the general effects of surrounding colours are reproduced ” 
(‘ Colours of Animals,’ p. 24); and in connection with this distinction 
it is interesting to note that in the most intelligent section of the 
animal kingdom, namely, the higher vertebrates, we find little but 
general resemblances, and the lower we go in the scale of intelligence, 
the more frequently do we observe special resemblances, that is, where 
colour is utilised for protective purposes. But, quite apart from this, 
it is evident that it is practically impossible to include cases of special 
resemblance under the term ‘‘active mimicry,’”’ as here discussed. 


Distant replies that ‘‘This is a cardinal doctrine in natural and apologetic 
theology, but is the very antithesis of science, natural or otherwise. The 
man who orders his whole life on probabilities will probably arrive at the 
conclusion that hope is a very good breakfast, but a most indifferent dinner.” 
Prof. Tyler’s remark appears to my mind as a sufficiently evident truth, but 
I may perhaps be permitted to adduce in its support the opinion of so virile 
a thinker as the late Prof. Huxley, who says: ‘‘ We find, practically, that 
expectations, based upon careful observations of past events, are, as a rule, 
trustworthy. We should be foolish indeed not to follow the only guide we 
have through life. But, for all that, our highest and surest generalizations 
remain on the level of justifiable expectations, that is, very high probabilities.” 
(‘Collected Essays,’ vol. v. p. 204.) 


On the other hand, Prof. Huxley, in thanking Bateson for his well-known 
volume on ‘ Variation,’ writes how glad he is to see ‘“‘ that we are getting back 
from the region of speculation into that of fact again” (‘Life and Letters,’ 
vol. iil. p. 872).— ED. 


CONSCIOUS PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 539 


For instance, in those wonderful cases which are found so frequently 
among insects, the habits of each species are so intimately correlated 
with its abnormal structure and colouring,‘ that it is unreasonable to 
believe that these characters have been developed independently by 
different factors; the latter by natural selection, and the former by the 
“evolution of active mimicry,” whatever that may mean. These 
special structures cannot be accounted for by ‘‘ active mimicry,” neither 
can they be explained by any general theory of internal or external 
causes, for, as the late Mr. Romanes has well remarked, ‘‘ Were it not 
that some of Darwin’s critics have overlooked the very point wherein 
the great value of protective colouring as evidence of natural selection 
consists, it would be needless to observe that it does so in the minute- 
ness of the protective resemblance which in so many cases is presented. 
Of course, where the resemblance is only very general, the phenomena 
might be ascribed to mere coincidence, of which the instincts of the 
animal have taken advantage. But in the measure that the resem- 
blance becomes minutely detailed, the supposition of mere coincidence 
is excluded, and the agency of some specially adaptive cause de- 
monstrated ’’ (‘ Darwin and after Darwin,’ p. 318, note). 

Thus a strong objection may be lodged against the whole suggestion 
of active mimicry, as opposed to that of natural selection, in that 
the former suggestion is essentially incomplete and cannot explain all 
the facts of the case. Let us take the instance of the leaf-butterflies 
of the genus Kallima, of which Mr. Distant says: ‘‘The partiality of 
this insect for settling on dry and withered leaves appears a true 
instance of active mimicry ”’ (/. c., 1899, p. 581).° Upon the theory of 
natural selection ‘granted the undisputed facts of variation and the 
struggle for existence), it is easy to understand that any marked varia- 
tions in the direction of leaf-like shapes or markings, which would 
afford better concealment, would tend to be preserved and further 
augmented, both by heredity and by the increased keenness of enemies, 
until the present admirable resemblance had been arrived at. ‘‘ But, 
as Mr. Badenoch has well enquired, ‘Of what avail would be the dis- 
guise were the insect prone to settle upon a flower, or green leaf, or 
other inappropriate surface ?’”’ (l. c.). Quite true; and the fact that 
the insect is not so inclined is readily explainable by the Darwinian 
theory; for it is clear that a much greater proportion of those 
individuals which were prone to render themselves conspicuous by 
settling on inappropriate surfaces would be picked off by their enemies 
than of those which selected suitable resting places; and thus, by a 
gradual process of elimination, the progeny of those individuals, which 
possessed a well-defined instinct to settle upon withered leaves, &c., 


540 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


would eventually supersede those whose instincts were not so well in 
harmony with their colouration. On the other hand, for the suggestion 
of ‘‘active mimicry,” it is contended that the actions of these insects are 
apparently so purposive that it is difficult to believe that they are not 
due to ‘‘ conscious volition”’ on their part; and, in support of this conten- 
tion, a large number of other similar cases are adduced, all, be it noted, 
equally, or more fully, I consider, explicable on the theory of natural 
selection. But when we stop to enquire why, or how, these butterflies 
have developed this peculiar colouration, the supporters of the suggestion 
of ‘active mimicry” can vouchsafe us no reply. According to this 
suggestion, the tiger selects the bamboo-thicket, the leopard the leafy 
forest, and the lion the open veldt, simply because they have individu- 
ally discovered, by their own reasoning powers, that these respective 
localities are best suited to their particular styles of colouration ;* and 
the question why one is striped, another spotted, and the third uni- 
colourous, reverts to an open problem. Thus all the beautiful explana- 
tions of adaptive colouring, afforded us by Darwin’s grand conception, 
are to be thrown to the winds if ‘active mimicry’’ be logically 
applied. ’ 

It will be thus seen that it is only among the most generalised types 
of resemblance that we may seek for signs of conscious adaptation, as 
opposed to quasi-mechanical instincts. But even here the foregoing 
objection also applies, though with less force, since the contention of 
coincidence may be put forward in some cases, as indicated by Mr. 
Romanes. But it must be borne in mind that this contention is 
nothing but an argument from ignorance, and, as such, is not scientific- 
ally permissible where any other reasonable and adequate explanation 
can be advanced. The mere citation of a number of instances of 
protective colouring, however purposive the actions of the animals may 
appear, are in themselves no proof of conscious resemblance; neither 
do they in any way weaken the theory of natural selection. in this — 
regard ; for this theory not only consistently explains the reasons for, 
and the development of, the colouration, but also accounts for that very 
purposiveness upon the occurrence of which the former proposition is 
alone based. Again, in the case of special resemblances, if it be con- 
ceded, as a result of the arguments adduced above, that both the 
morphological and psychological characters have been contemporane- 
ously perfected through the mechanical action of natural selection (and 
in fact the structural peculiarities cannot well be explained on this 
principle without the instincts), then this alone would form strong 

* This is an apparent inference to Mr. Marshal), but no statement of the 
kind appears in the suggestions criticised.— Ep. 


CONSCIOUS PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 541 


presumptive evidence that, at least, the great majority of cases of 
general resemblance are due to the same factor. For it is evident that 
all cases of special resemblance must, at some time or other, have 
passed through a general phase, and therefore we must necessarily 
apply the same explanation in both categories. | 

Nevertheless, while the orthodox Darwinist may maintain that 
protective colouration, together with the appropriate instincts which 
are necessary to render it of any use, have been ultimately developed 
through natural selection (save, perhaps, in a very few exceptional 
cases),’ yet it is competent for him, without any contradiction, to admit 
that probably some few of the most intelligent animals may, in the 
course of their mental evolution, have arrived at such a standard as to 
be able to appreciate the value of their own protective actions, which 
were Originally merely instinctive—a very different position, however, 
from that suggested by Mr. Distant. 

But even for such an admission some definite proof is required. 
On looking through the large number of instances quoted by Mr. 
Distant in support of his suggestions, there appears to be only one case 
which affords anything like real proof, as opposed to mere suggestion. 
I refer to Mr. EK. 8. Thompson’s account of the actions of a fox: “A 
fire had swept the middle of the pasture, leaving a broad belt of black; 
over this he skurried until he came to the unburnt yellow grass again, . 
when he squatted down and was lost to view. He had been watching 
us all the time, and would not have moved had we kept to the road. 
The wonderful part of this is, not that he resembled the round stones 
and dry grass, but that he knew he did, and was ready to profit by it”’ 
(‘Wild Animals I have known,’ p. 193). Thisis a good example from 
Mr. Distant’s point of view, but the fox is notoriously one of the most 
Sagacious and cunning of animals, and, even if we believe that many 
of its actions are due to conscious intelligence, this does not in any way 
prove the occurrence of such intelligence in insects, fishes, or even 
other mammals, each of which cases would require mdependent proof. 
Further, it may be as well to point out that probably the process of 
reasoning in the fox would be quite different from that which would 
prompt a man to put on a khaki-coloured shirt when going out to shoot 
buck. It is improbable that any of the lower animals have any real 
conception of their own appearance, and it is likely that any conscious- 
ness they may exhibit in their protective actions consists rather in the 
general recognition that they are freer from attack in certain particular 
spots or types of country, than from any true appreciation of the 
optical phenomena to which they really owe their safety. 

But it must be noted that a mere desire to hide, apart from any 


542 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


colour consideration, cannot be regarded in itself as any evidence of 
conscious resemblance. For example: if we break a piece off a 
termite-heap and see that the inmates at once run back into the nest 
or avail themselves of the nearest cover they can find, we cannot 
assume that this is due to their intelligent recognition that their 
colours are out of harmony with their then surroundings, but we should 
rather attribute it to the instinctive avoidance of light shown by all 
such nocturnal creatures, an instinct which is preferably explained by 
natural selection.® 

As a matter of fact, the most satisfactory style of evidence would 
probably consist in a careful and exact observation of the demeanour 
of protectively-coloured animals, which ftnd themselves, by a natural 
accident or necessity, in an environment to which their colour is 
quite unsuited ; or, conversely, of the behaviour of striking sports or 
variations of such species, when occurring in their normal surround- 
ings. If, in such cases, the animals show a distinct appreciation 
of the danger of their position and alter their normal habits accord- 
ingly, then the suggestion of active mimicry will be sufficiently 
proved, so far as those animals and their immediate allies are 
concerned. But if, on the other hand, they show no such appre- 
ciation and merely adopt their usual attitudes of concealment, which 
in that case would egregiously fail in their purpose, then this sug- 
gestion will be very strongly discounted. It seems that a careful 
collection and discussion of all the authenticated observations of 
this description would add considerably to our knowledge of animal 
psychology. Perhaps, however, this has been already done, for it is 
impossible to keep abreast of scientific thought and work when living 
on the very outskirts of civilisation. I may here refer to one or two 
examples of this kind which tend to show that many cases of protective 
actions on the part of the higher vertebrates must be attributed to 
UNREASONING INSTINCT rather than to conscious volition. 

The late Mr. Romanes very truly remarked, that ‘‘ Every sportsman 
must have noticed that the somewhat rare melanic variety of the 
common Rabbit will crouch as steadily as the normal brownish-grey 
type, notwithstanding that, owing to its normal colour, a ‘nigger 
rabbit’ thus renders itself the most conspicuous object in the land- 
scape. In all such cases, of course, there has been a deviation from 
the normal type in respect of colour, with the result that the inherited 
instinct is no longer in tune with the other endowments of the animal”’ 
(‘Darwin and after Darwin,’ p. 320). Again, to quote Mr. Distant 
himself, in reference to the crouching habits of the South African 
Francolinus, he says: ‘‘ Subsequently I observed how this action 


CONSCIOUS PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 543 


could become habitual without a suitable environment. I flushed a 
pair of Francolinus subtorquatus, one of which squatted in the same 
manner, but, by force of circumstances, among the short, black and 
charred remains of a grass fire. Here its colour stood out in bold 
relief, and I easily bagged it’ (Zool. 1899, p. 545, note). I have on 
several occasions observed a similar behaviour on the part of this same 
bird in Mashonaland ; and, indeed, the blackening of the veldt by grass 
fires not unfrequently gives one opportunities of realising that at least 
some protectively coloured animals have no mental appreciation what- 
ever of the real relation between their own colouring and that of their 
environment. 

There are few birds in this country which show a stronger apparent 
reliance on their protective colouring than the little Rufous-capped 
Lark (Tephrocorys cinerea) or the Cape Long-claw (Macronyx capensis) ; 
they will readily permit one to approach within a few yards of them, 
and will then merely run on ahead in their curious, crouching, rat-like 
manner. ‘This action is certainly of considerable protective value in 
their ordinary surroundings, but they will do precisely the same on 
the open ‘‘ burns,’’ where it must be rather detrimental than other- 
wise. Did they really comprehend the contrast exhibited by their 
plumage in such spots, they would assuredly escape by flight instead 
of by running. Not long ago I noticed a similar case on the part of 
our common Side-striped Jackal (Canis lateralis), While travelling on 
a post-cart we passed a fire burning not far from the road, and strongly 
outlined against the burnt grass we saw the forms of two Jackals. 
They were a little distance apart, one sitting on its haunches, the 
other standing, and they were evidently watching for the rats, young 
birds, &c., which the fire would disturb. At our approach they merely 
looked round at us without concern, and so, without stopping the cart, 
one of my companions tried a shot with his rifle. The bullet whizzed 
close over the head of the standing animal, which promptly bounded 
into the long, unburnt grass; the other, however, which had only 
heard the report without feeling the shock of the bullet, merely 
crouched to the ground, when it was quite as conspicuous as before, 
and did not move until a second bullet knocked up the dust close by 
its side. I have further seen an identical instance of the misapplica- 
tion of the protective crouching instinct on the part of the Aard Wolf 
(Proteles cristatus) in Natal; and, doubtless, such observations could be 
multiplied were special attention paid to them. 

Anyone who has had many opportunities of observing animals must 
have been struck by the fact that even though they may possess a con- 
siderable amount of intelligence, this is curiously limited in many 


544 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


directions. This may even occur in an unexpected way, as in the 
observation of Col. Pollok, cited by Mr. Distant, that the Tiger has 
not yet learnt that in pursuit of game nothing can be done down wind. 
Considerations such as these must lend a certain measure of support 
to the mechanical conception of natural selection. Thus, in the matter 
of conscious resemblance, although many animals may show undoubted 
intelligence in other directions, it is highly probable that, in the great 
majority of cases, their reasoning powers would not be sufficient to enable 
them to decide whether, or no, their own colouring would have a pro- 
tective value in any new or unusual environment, It is far more 
reasonable to suppose that such knowledge as they may have in this 
respect would be acquired through their experience of their liability to, 
or immunity from, attack under such conditions, quite apart from any 
colour considerations. The former process would be a true instance 
of ‘‘ active mimicry,” as defined by Mr. Distant, but the latter cannot 
be included under that term; indeed, in such cases, experience in the 
individual is the equivalent of natural selection in the species. 

In the preliminary portion of his paper, Mr. Distant has given us 
many excellent examples and arguments to show that mimicry and 
protective resemblance probably existed in very remote antiquity ;” 
and he has done well in drawing attention to the matter, which is apt 
to be overlooked. But I must certainly join issue with him when he 
states that: ‘The present attitude of many champions of the cause, 
who seek to find, or to invent, present factors for producing these 
phenomena, seems fraught with peril for the whole theory; and, with 
the same weariness and perseverance with which the original promul- 
gators thought out the doctrine, we must go on searching for further 
proofs, which will necessitate our appealing to the Cesar of the past— 
the ever-growing science of paleontology ”’ (/.c., p. 802). I must con- 
fess that this appears to me to be a very remarkable assertion. In the 
first place, the vast majority of cases generally referred to mimicry and 
resemblance are concerned with colour and movement alone, structure 
playing but a very subordinate part therein.* Mr. Distant has himself 
been at some pains to show the very evident futility of appealing to 


* The point discussed was the strwctwral characters of the Phasmide. The 
exact quotation requires this antecedent: ‘‘ We still have abundant reason 
for believing that, though the protective resemblance of these Phasmide was 
already acquired in Carboniferous times, the presence of Amphibia in an 
evolutionary sense is quite sufficient to account for it. This prompts two 
reflections: one, that we ought to look a long way back for the origins of 
these protective and mimetic guises; and the other, that we may reason- 
ably hope to find them” (p. 802).—Eb. 


CONSCIOUS PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 545 


paleontology for evidence as to these phenomena ; thus, if we are denied 
the right of attempting to explain them by causes acting at the present 
time, we shall have to abandon the whole question in despair. But, 
what is more important, mimicry and resemblance are only particular 
aspects of the principle of natural selection, and therefore if the factors 
of mimicry do not exist to-day, then, a posteriori, neither do those of 
natural selection. A single glance at nature is sufficient to justify the 
rejection of such a conclusion, and we must, therefore, admit that the 
factors of mimicry are in actual operation now; were they not, we 
should have no grounds for assuming that they had operated in past 
geological epochs. If, therefore, we find that certain cases appear 
difficult of exact explanation in the present state of our knowledge, we 
are by no means justified in disposing of the difficulty by referring them 
to causes operating only in the dim past, which we can neither prove 
nor disprove. Rather must we continue the laborious search for further 
evidence, not by a study of the anatomy of extinct animals, but by 
seeking a deeper and more intimate knowledge of the real life-histories 
of living organisms ; for we are still profoundly ignorant of the im- 
mensely complex factors which go to make up the conditions of life of 
the very commonest animal upon this earth. 

Nevertheless, it must be conceded as possible that there may be 
certain cases of mimicry or resemblance which cannot be attributed to 
exact causes acting at the present time; but these would be only ex- 
ceptional, and would probably be due to a recent change in the enemies 
or the general environment of the species. I say ‘‘ recent”’ advisedly, 
for we have very good grounds for believing that complicated protective 
characters would gradually disappear soon after the need for them 
ceased, whether this disappearance be attributed to pammixis or to 
disuse. 

Later on, in the papers under consideration, we find an excellent 
suggestion that all examples of mimicry and resemblance should be 
classified under various headings, such as—Demonstrated—Suggested 
or Probable—Disputed or Mistaken—Purposeless—or Active. If such 
an arrangement could be thoroughly and carefully carried out, it 
would be of considerable value to students of these phenomena. Mr. 
Distant could, of course, only give us a mere sketch of the subject ; 
but it is remarkable that there is not even a reference to the lengthy 
and important paper by Prof. Poulton, who has so thoroughly identi- 
fied himself with this line of research, on ‘‘ The Experimental Proof 
of the Protective Value of Colour and Markings in Insects in reference 
to their Vertebrate Enemies” (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1887, pp. 191-274), in 
which all the reliable experiments on British insects, up to that date, 

Zool. 4th ser. vol. IV., December, 1400. 2P 


546 THE ZOO0LOGIST. ' 


are tabulated and discussed.* Unfortunately, however, the classifica- 
tion of several of the cases given by Mr. Distant is open to criticism. 
For example: in the instances of resemblances in birds, given by Mr. 
J. H. Gurney (I. c., 1899, p. 460), every case relates to species of the 
same genus inhabiting different areas—in fact, representative species, 
or even local races; and the resemblances between them are simply due 
to close kinship, and have nothing whatever to do with the subject of 
mimicry. Again, a reference to the suggested mimicry of the Cape Hunt- 
ing Dog (Lycaon pictus), of the Spotted Hyena (Hyena crocuta), is placed 
under the heading of ‘“‘ Suggested or Probable Mimicry”’ (l.¢., p. 449), 
although Mr. Lydekker’s remarks, showing the difficulty of accepting 
this proposition, are quoted. Indeed, I have always been at a loss to 
understand how such a strong and fearless animal as the former—of 
which Selous has recorded that it ‘‘is capable of overtaking and 
attacking single-handed such a powerful animal as a male Sable 
Antelope’’ (‘ Hunter’s Wanderings in Africa,’ p. 857)—could be sup- 
posed to derive any benefit from resembling a cowardly brute like the 
Hyena. ‘To anyone acquainted with the two animals in nature, it is 
abundantly evident that, whatever mimicry there may be between 
them, it would be in just the reverse direction; that is, the skulking 
Hyena would materially benefit by being mistaken for the bold and 
gregarious Hunting Dog." 

I need only refer to one more example—namely, that of the Honey 
Bee (/. c., p. 8356). It is well known that various species of the dipterous 
genus Hristalis mimic Bees; and Mr. Distant quotes the experiments 
of Prof. Lloyd Morgan with Chickens, and Mr. R. J. Pocock with 
Spiders, which demonstrate the value of this mimicry. Yet this 
instance is not placed in the ‘‘ Demonstrable”’ category, but in that 
of ‘‘ Suggested or Probable,”’ on the ground that ‘“ the Bee itself is not 
absoluiely protected by its sting.’’ If such a classification were adhered 
to, there never would be a case of demonstrated mimicry; but it must 
be noted that, on the same page, it is explained that: ‘‘ By the term 
‘Demonstrable’ is implied all those instances where protection, abso- 
lute or partial, has been, or can be, demonstrated by experiment or 
actual observation.” ® 


It now only remains to discuss the objections raised by Mr. Distant 


* The writer may not have referred to every paper that Prof. Poulton 
has written, but he certainly did write (p. 451): ‘“ Poulton has focussed many 
observations respecting instances in the Insecta, largely augmented by in- 
formation received from the well-known coleopterist C. J. Gahan” (cf. Journ. 


Linn. Soe. xxvi. pp. 558-612 (1898) ); a much later paper than that referred 
to by Mr. Marshall.—Ep. 


CONSCIOUS PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 547 


to certain cases which are generally referred to protective resemblance. 
After stating that ‘‘ colour alone may prove a false analogy to protec- 
tion” (l.c., p. 850), and referring to the strongly protective colouring 
of a certain South American butterfly, Ageronia feronica, he says: 
‘¢This observer, however, at the same time refers to the statement of 
Bigg Witker, that this very insect is called the Whip-Butterfly, owing 
to the sharp whip-cracking sound made by its wings when battling 
by its fellows in the air,“ and that this sound makes it the easy prey 
of a forest bird, locally known as ‘the Suruqua,’ who thus detects 
and secures it. Here the apparent protection by ‘‘ protective resem- 
blance”’ is invalidated by a peculiar and unusual sound-producing 
quality, which is as equally dangerous as its colour is reported protec- 
tive. A similar remark may be made as to the musical Cicadide. How 
often have the usual green and brown colours of these insects been 
adduced as an example of protective resemblance; . . . but when we 
desire to capture them the shrill noise proclaims their retreat, and 
their assimilative colouration avails them little.” Again, in comment- 
ing upon Mr. Tutt’s graphic account of the protective colouring of the 
Lappet Moth (Lasiocampa quercifolia), he says: ‘‘ Here the expression, 
‘trained eye,’ of the entomologist, would suggest a more developed 
‘trained eye’ of the moth’s natural enemies, and hence any theory of 
protective mimicry is much discounted (l.c. p. 455). From these quo- 
tations it may be gathered that Mr. Distant’s attitude towards the 
subject is somewhat as follows :—When we find that the colouring of 
any animal assimilates well with that of its environment, but, at the 
same time, that this animal is apt to render itself more or less notice- 
able by certain movements or noises, then we are not justified in 
regarding its colouration as an efficient protection, and the case must 
therefore be removed from the category of protective resemblance. 
Tempting as such a conclusion may be to the opponents of Darwinism,* 
it appears to me to be wholly erroneous. The fundamental fallacy 
lies in the gratuitous assumption that the protection afforded must be 
absolute ; for otherwise there is no ground whatever for the objection 
‘raised. In the first place, I am not aware that such absolute protec- 
tion has been anywhere observed in nature, and, indeed, were the 
above proposition a sound one, the principle of protective resemblance 
would have to be entirely abandoned. But, as a matter of fact, this 
principle predicates no such complete immunity from attack; in truth, 
the very essence of the theory of natural selection negatives any such 


** Darwinism does not derive its sole support from theories of ‘‘ mimicry,” 
and the writer of the papers criticised was not aware that he was to be counted 


among “‘the opponents of Darwinism.’’—Eb. i 
2P2 


548 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


supposition ; for, according to this theory, protective resemblance, as 
we now see it, has been arrived at by the gradual accumulation and 
improvement of colour variations which make for concealment, and 
the protective value of such variations must essentially be, or have 
been, of only a partial character. Admitting that the gambols of the 
Whip Butterfly (presumably of a sexual character) lead the insect into 
a certain amount of danger, yet, to ask us to believe that it thereby 
‘‘ invalidates’ the protection afforded it, when at rest, by its assimila- 
tive colouring, against other enemies, and perhaps even against the 
‘‘ Suruqua’”’ itself, is, as Mr. Bateson puts it, referring to a different 
assumption, ‘‘ to ask us to abrogate reason.’’ Further, the not unusual 
fact, that animals exhibiting a very high grade of resemblance are yet 
subject to a considerable amount of persecution, in no way invalidates, 
but rather strengthens, this principle; for it is evident that such a 
degree of resemblance can only have been developed in response to a 
similarly high degree of persecution, acting either now, or within 
recent times. 

It will thus be seen that, on general considerations alone, the 
above objections to the principle of protective resemblance must be at 
once ruled out of court. It may be as well, however, to discuss the 
case of Cicadas in more detail. In the first place, I cannot agree 
with Mr. Distant that these insects are easily captured owing to their 
shrill cries. All high-pitched, vibrating sounds of this kind are very 
difficult to localise exactly, and with Cicadas I have noticed very 
frequently, both with myself and others, that the distance of the insect 
is invariably much underestimated.“ But even when the tree on 
which the Cicada is sitting has been ascertained, it must be very 
cautiously approached, for many species are able to detect one’s 
presence at a distance of fifteen to twenty yards in open country, and, 
on so doing, they will at once cease their call; and although they will 
generally permit a much closer approach than this, yet it is always 
extremely difficult to locate the exact position of the sound on the 
tree. Their habits, however, vary in this respect, and among the 
dozen or more species which I have observed in various parts of South 
Africa, 1 have found it to be a very general rule that their wariness is . 
inversely proportionate to their protective resemblance; those species 
which live on rough, knotted bark, or among dense foliage, permitting 
one to approach much nearer than do those that rest on bare, smooth 
trunks or small twigs. The above remarks apply to the calling of a 
single insect ; but, when a number are calling together, it is still more 
difficult to localise any particular cry; and, indeed, I have on several 
occasions been driven out of a patch of machabel bush by the con- 


CONSCIOUS PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 549 


tinuous ear-piercing scream of a number of the large Pecilopsaltria 
horizontalis, Karsch, which seems to make the whole air pulsate, with- 
out betraying the exact locality of a single individual. Although in 
many cases I have actually tracked down individuals by their cry, in 
order to learn the calls of the different species, yet such a method is 
far too laborious for ordinary collecting purposes. So experienced a 
collector as Dr. Percy Rendall says: ‘‘In the Transvaal I have also 
taken them at rest on tree-trunks, but I do not think they were taken 
in consequence of their song having thus localized them. At Zomba 
I caught a large species by actually localizing its noise, but that was 
the only instance of the kind that 1 remember ” (‘ Zoologist,’ 1897, 
p. 520). 

1t must not be supposed that I do not recognize that the Cicada’s 
cry must, under certain circumstances, be dangerous for individuals 
as, indeed, are many other secondary sexual characters; but Mr. Distant 
appears to have overestimated the danger, and the contention that this 
noise invalidates their admirably protective colouration appears to be 
an inverted way of looking at the question. It is more reasonable to 
suppose that the protective resemblance of these insects is so effica- 
cious, that they have been able to develop these extraordinary cries 
through the process of sexual selection (or perhaps even natural 
selection, supposing esthetic appreciation on the part of the female be 
denied), without unduly endangering the safety of the species. On this 
view, the Cicada’s song, far from proving that the insect’s colouring is 
inefficient for protective purposes, would stand as a testimony of its 
very high efficacy. In fact, I venture to think that, in the vast majority 
of cases in which animals produce conspicuously loud sounds, they will 
be found to possess either highly protective colouration or habits, or else 
distasteful or other qualities which render concealment unnecessary. 

In conclusion, I can only hope that sufficient has been said to show 
that there are good grounds for opposing the suggestion that active 
mimicry is of any general occurrence in the animal kingdom; and, 
further, that the attempt to minimise certain phenomena of ordinary 
protective resemblance, in order to bring them within the scope of that 
principle, is not justifiable upon the evidence adduced. The subject, 
however, is such a wide one, that it is impossible to deal adequately 
with all its aspects within the limits of a paper such as this, 


550 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


REMARKS ON THE PRECEDING PAPER. 


By Epwarp B. Pouuton, M.A., F.R.S. 
(Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford; Hope Professor of Zoology in the University.) 


My friend Mr. Marshall has asked me to make any alterations or 
corrections in his paper. I find, however, that I so entirely agree with 
the whole of the argument that I have merely added a few confirma- 
tory notes to certain passages’ in the paper, which are in each case 
marked by a numBer. 

1H. W. Bates, in his classical paper, also used the term mimicry 
in the wider sense employed by W. L. Distant. The majority of 
naturalists have since followed A. R. Wallace in keeping Protective 
and Aggressive Resemblance distinct from Mimicry—a course which 
appears to be convenient, inasmuch as the distinction in terms cor- 
responds to a real distinction in the modes of defence. In the former, 
an animal resembles an object which is of no interest to its enemy, 
and in so doing becomes concealed; in the latter, an animal resembles 
an object which its enemy knows well and fears or dislikes, and in so 
doing becomes conspicuous. Other superficial resemblances—such as 
those produced by protective resemblances in common, warning colours 
in common (Millerian mimicry), and functions in common (analogical 
or adaptive resemblances of Darwin)—are excluded from mimicry as 
here defined. 

2 See the discussion on ‘“‘ Organic Selection,” reported in ‘ Science,’ 
N.S. vol. vi. No. 146, Oct. 15, 1897, where this view was sustained. 

’ Probably most evolutionists would hesitate before committing 
themselves to such a conclusion. Highly intelligent animals, such as 
birds, crouch and hide when very young at every unusual sound. This 
action is performed instinctively and unintelligently, and is apparently 
an automatic response to stimulus. When the stimulus has been 
repeated, and no danger is apparent, the young birds cease to crouch. 
We are not justified in considering that their intelligence has done 
more than enable them to inhibit an unnecessary response. There is 
no reason to think that they have any understanding of the meaning 
of the response itself. See Lloyd Morgan’s ‘Habit and Instinct’ 
(London, 1896). 

4Tt should be remembered that the structure and colouring are 
themselves made up of many complex factors, all of which must 
co-operate if the mimetic or protective resemblance is to be effective. 
See Linnean Soc. Journ., Zool., vol. xxvi. pp. 576-578. 


Hf 


CONSCIOUS PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 551 


> That is to say, where the high cerebral development exists which 
would, according to W. L. Distant, tend to produce mimicry and 
protective resemblances, precisely there these adaptations are lowly 
developed as compared with Insecta, where we meet with far less intel- 
ligence and far more of the unvarying repetitions of pure instinct, 
incapable of improvement by learning, and, within their rigid limits, 
too perfect to require it. Where the conditions are most favourable 
for ‘“‘active mimicry,’ mimetic and cryptic adaptations are least 
prominent; where they are least favourable, these adaptations become 
most conspicuous. 

6 So far as I have been able to collect evidence, Kallima does not 
rest on dry and withered leaves, but in situations, such as trunks and 
branches, in which dead leaves would not attract attention. H. J. Elwes 
has stated that it freely expands its wings when settled, and looks any- 
thing but leaf-like; but this is probably when it is thoroughly on the 
alert, during the short pauses between successive flights. C. Swinhoe 
has informed me that it invariably rests head downwards, like a dead 
leaf hanging by its stalk, so that all the figures and preparations seen 
in this country representing its natural attitude are wrong.* 

It is quite impossible to explain the protective attitude of this or 
any other insect on the principle of ‘‘ active mimicry,’’ unless we are 
going arbitrarily to assume that certain defensive activities are to be 
explained in this way, while others, equally necessary and equally 
elaborate, cannot be thus interpreted. Consider, for instance, the 
concealment often brought by the cocoon—the selection of an appro- 
priate situation, the building into the walls of a part of the surrounding 
surface, &c., &c. Upon the principle of ‘‘ active mimicry,” ‘the view 
would be, I suppose, that the ancestral larva spun a cocoon which was 
not much of a success, and was in consequence attacked by enemies ; 
that the larva observed these attacks, and accordingly improved its 
cocoon. But that is not the way in which the struggle for existence is 
waged with insects. If the larva failed, it failed, and that would be 
the end of the matter. It has no chance of improvement; it has no 
opportunity of learning by experience. Its only chance of survival is 
to avoid experience of foes altogether ; experience is the most danger- 
ous thing in the world for an edible insect. This becomes still more 
obvious when we remember that failure or success is almost always 
determined long after the cocoon is made. The caterpillar, perhaps, 
spins thé cocoon in autumn, but the real stress of competition will 
come in winter, when insect-eating animals are pressed hard with 
hunger, and search high and low for food. But the caterpillar is by 


* Of. Eha, ‘ Natural Science,’ vol. ix. p. 299.—Ep. 


552 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


this time a chrysalis, and of course has no opportunity of improving 
the cocoon. The selective test is applied long after the operation has 
been performed, and when there is no possibility of gaining by experi- 
ence. We are thrown back, then, solely upon natural selection, which 
acts on the nervous system of the caterpillar, and thus compels it to 
make the cocoon in a certain way. In other words, those caterpillars 
which are impelled by their nervous system to make ill-formed con- 
spicuous cocoons have no chance of living, and, in future stages, 
producing offspring. Hence the selection caused by the keen sight of 
foes first raises, and then maintains at a high level, the standard of 
cocoon-making.” 

‘‘This contention as to the uselessness and danger of experience 
applies to the whole of those smaller defenceless animals which have 
no chance of fighting with their enemies, or of escaping when once they 
have been detected” (‘ Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist.’ vol. xxvi. p. 391). 

It would be a most gratuitous indulgence in unnecessary hypothesis 
to insist that the appropriate attitude which gives a meaning to form 
and colour, and itself receives a meaning from these, originated in one 
way in the caterpillar, and in another and totally different way in the 
imago which develops from it. 

7 See note (8). 

8 The observation does not prove more than that the fox seeks cover 
and hides when he sees that he is observed by man. The burnt sur- 
face did not afford cover, and the fox sought it elsewhere. It would be 
very rash to assume from the observation that the fox knew anything 
about his own protective colouring. 

° Or the numberless examples of insects which fall motionless when 
their food-plant is shaken. 

10 There are many reasons for considering that colours and patterns 
change very rapidly when no longer sustained by natural selection. 
When animals become cave-dwellers, or inhabit the greatest depths of 
the ocean, their colours are profoundly modified and often tend to 
disappear. This happens in forms closely allied to others which still 
retain the normal colouring and live in the light. 

The majority of domestic animals have been immensely modified in 
this respect in a measurable number of years. In some cases these 
changes have been brought about without the aid of specially directed 
artificial selection. Thus a large proportion of our fowls produce 
white eggs instead of the brown of the ancestral species. 

Again, the enormous difference between the colours and patterns of 
certain closely-allied species is evidence for ease and rapidity of change 
rather than stability in this element of structure. The argument 
becomes stronger when we cousider the cases of sexual and seasonal, 


CONSCIOUS PROTECTIVE RESEMBLANCE. 558 


and other di- or poly-morphism in the different individuals of the same 
species. A single instance will make this clear. There are certain 
genera of butterflies, such as Dismorphia (in the wide sense), Pseud- 
acrea, and Hypolimnas (also in the wide sense), of which almost the 
whole of the numerous species are mimetic. Within the limits of each 
genus the most divergent models have been followed, so that utterly 
different colours and patterns have been produced in forms which are 
still closely related, and in other structural features exhibit no corre- 
sponding differences. In the most extreme case known to me, imménse 
differences occur in the different races of a form which systematists 
consider as a single species, viz. Hypolimnas bolina. If we compare 
the Indian form of female with those of the Malayan region, Australia, 
and Polynesia, including Fiji (in which the local race itself con- 
tains the most widely divergent forms), and remember that no corre- 
sponding differences exist which would justify us in conferring specific 
rank in any of the cases, we are driven to the conclusion that colour 
and pattern are the most superficial of all specific characters,—of all 
the least likely to persist unchanged when the models upon which they 
were founded have long since disappeared. 

In one special case which I have observed, there is evidence that 
changes in the nervous system have outlasted the markings which once 
gave a meaning to them. Some of the remarkable larve of the genus 
Ophideres have two eye-spots at the junction of the anterior and middle 
third of the body. They have the instinct of bending the anterior 
third so that it rests under the middle one, and thus the eye-spots are 
brought into an appropriate position apparently at the anterior end of 
a somewhat snake-like body. But a caterpillar of this genus which I 
found in Teneriffe assumed the attitude, on irritation, although the 
eye-spots were almost completely wanting. 

1 Tt is worth considering whether the Mullerian principle may have 
been operative in this case. 

2 Of course, no natural selectionist has ever been so unreasonable 
as to contend for absolute protection. In every species, whether 
defended by the most distasteful or dangerous qualities, or the most 
effective concealment, no more can be achieved than to keep up the 
average numbers under average conditions, and this means that an 
immense majority of individuals are doomed to failure. As regards 
concealment, success merely means that enemies have so far to work 
for their living that in the time at their disposal they cannot do more 
than reduce the number of individuals to the average. Warning 
colours and unpalatable or otherwise unpleasant qualities are more 
complex as a means of defence, depending as they do for their success 
upon the co-existence of other more desirable food. Their operation, 


554 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


under favourable circumstances, is probably to reduce the number of 
enemies, this success being compensated, however, by the more per- 
sistent attacks of certain special enemies—the result being the same as 
in the cryptic colouring, namely, to keep up the average number of 
individuals. ! 

#8 Darwin remarks on the sound made by this species (‘ Voyage of 
the Beagle’), which he witnessed during his travels in South America, 
He believed that the sound was of sexual significance, and in his essay 
on sexual selection compared it to that made by the males of Halias 
prasinana during courtship —a sound which I have myself once heard. 
The display or exercise of secondary sexual characters is probably often 
a danger to the individual, although I fail to see how it is possible 
to argue from this that the cryptic colouring and attitudes of other 
phases of life are thereby rendered inoperative and valueless. The 
sound-producing time is one of high activity and rapid movement in 
both the species of Lepidoptera mentioned ; in the case of the common 
English moth it is indulged in so rarely, that comparatively few 
naturalists have ever heard it, while in Ageronia it is not likely to be 
produced during more than a very small proportion of the life of the 
male. As to its cryptic colouring and, of even more importance, the 
corresponding instinctive attitudes and movements, Darwin made 
special remark in the volume already mentioned. 

14 T have noticed the same thing in North America. Not only was 
the distance very difficult to estimate, but the direction from which the 
sound came equally hard to trace. 


[In closing this discussion, which has now extended beyond the limited 
space of ‘ The Zoologist,’ as writer of the incriminated ‘‘ Suggestions,” I ought 
perhaps to make some rejoinder. This is unnecessary to my friend Mr. 
Marshall’s objections, as they principally express an ably stated difference of 
opinion, and I have merely added footnotes to make his quotations from my 
suggestions a little more ample and representative. Prof. Poulton, in for- 
warding his ‘‘ Notes,”’ with his usual fairness, wrote: ‘‘ My remarks are more 
of a reinforcement of Marshall’s arguments than a direct answer to your 
paper, which I have not seen. I expect, however, from Marshall’s MS., that 
they do affect the drift of your argument, and are therefore in the nature of a 
reply.” This statement of course disarms any rejoinder. Besides which a 
comparison of Poulton’s notes to Marshall’s opinions also discloses a diversity 
of view, though the first named states he entirely agrees with Mr. Marshall’s 
argument. Thus Mr. Marshall writes (ante, p. 588), “It is possible no 
evolutionist would deny,” and Prof. Poulton to this adds the note, ‘‘ Probably 
most evolutionists would hesitate before committing themselves to such a 
conclusion.” Again, they both differ as to the active mimicry of the Fox 
(cf, pp. 541, 552). A triangular discussion is therefore out of the question, 
and we may continue to differ in opinion and search together for facts.—ED. | 


( 555 ) 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 


MAMMALIA, 


Wild Cat.—In reply to Mr. Harvie-Brown’s enquiry in ‘ The Zoologist ’ 
(ante, p. 477), the best pictures from life of the Wild Cat with which I am 
acquainted are those published in the ‘ Badminton Magazine’ for October, 
1895 ; ‘The Artist,’ for July, 1897; and ‘ Autumns in Argyleshire with 
Rod and Gun,’ just issued. These are from studies taken direct from life 
by Mr. Archibald Thorburn from a fine male then in the possession of the 
late Lord Lilford.—R. J. Howarp (Shear Bank, Blackburn). 


AVES. 


Nesting of the Marsh-Warbler in Wiltshire.—My son (H. S. Hall, 
Jun.) had the good luck to find a nest of the Marsh-Warbler (Acrocephalus 
palustris) on June 18th of the present year. He was Trout-fishing on one 
of the tributaries of the river Wylye, near the village of Stapleford, and 
spent some time in searching for nests of the Reed-Warbler in an adjacent 
osier-bed. He brought home five or six eggs, taken here and there from 
different nests, and one of these I at once picked out as a typical Marsh- 
Warbler’s egg. The next day I visited the nest, and, from a careful study 
of its materials, position, and surroundings, my first impression was amply 
confirmed. I may state that during the last few years I have examined 
several nests of the Marsh-Warbler in the neighbourhood of Bath ; two of 
these have been recorded in this Journal (¢f. Zool. 1894, p. 304; 1895, 
p. 804) by personal friends of my own, with whom I have spent much time 
in studying the Marsh-Warbler’s nesting habits. It is therefore with the 
fullest confidence that I am able to record this species as having bred in 
Wiltshire ; whether it has been observed in this county before I do not 
know, but I have found no mention of it in Smith’s ‘ Birds of Wiltshire.’— 
H. 8. Hatt (Clifton, Bristol). 


Is the Siskin an Autumn and Winter Songster ?—Is it the habit of 
the Siskin (Chrysomitris spinus), in a state of freedom, to repeat its song in 
autumn and winter? Five Siskins happened to fly into some fir-trees in our 
garden to-day (Nov. 17th), and one of the male birds proceeded to rehearse 
his artless but inspiring strain, which I had not listened to since June last. 
Hence I venture to ask of those who have had better facilities for studying 


556 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Siskins than myself whether the Siskin is to be considered one of our 
regular winter songsters, Two pairs of Siskins passed the summer in the 
neighbourhood of Pitlochry, but I fancy that they nested in private grounds. 
At all events, we saw nothing of either nests or young, though both adult 
and immature birds were caught by a pointsman early in September.—H. 
A. Macpuerson (The Rectory, Pitlochry). 


Number of Eggs in the Nest of Swift |Cypselus apus)—tThe follow- 
ing incident may be worth mention in connection with this subject. In 
1894 there was under the rvof of the house where I was then living a Swift’s 
nest containing three eggs, one of wnich had an imperfect shell, as if there 
had not been quite enough material to finish it. The following year the 
nest contained three eggs, all of which had perfect shells. This makes it 
probable that in the latter year the birds had just reached their breeding 
prime. Unluckily, in 1895 a ventilating shaft was run up close to the nest, 
in consequence of which the birds deserted the site. —A. Banxes (Leaden- 
hall, The Close, Salisbury). 


The Little Owl (Carine noctua).—At frequent intervals the Little Owl 
is recorded as having been obtained in some part of the kingdom, as if its 
occurrence was that of some rare straggler. The collectors of these birds 
are in reality, however, only thwarting the endeavours of those who for 
many years have been trying their utmost to establish this bird as an 
introduced species. Little Owls have been released in numbers in various 
parts of the kingdom for years past, and in some districts have bred 
regularly, and are in a fair way to becoming permanently established. If 
the stragglers from these colonies were left alone the species would speedily 
become general throughout the country, aud we should have the pleasure of 
seeing this entertaining little bird frequently, for the Little Owl is net noc- 
turual, as is the majority of the Owl family, but is to a great extent diurnal, 
and a frequenter of comparatively open ground, rocks, orchards, &. It is 
needless to add that it is harmless, and also that it is very useful. Intro- 
duced species are not always a success, but no harm and much pleasure is 
to be got by encouraging this bird; and the acquisition of the dead body of 
an introduced species, or of an escape, can be of no interest even to the 
collector of British birds.—E. G. B. Meape-Wa .vo. , 


The Little Owl in North Wales (?),—In the October number of ‘ The 
Zoologist’ (ante, p. 482), Mr. H. E. Forrest questions the occurrence of 
the Little Owl (Carine noctua) in Flintshire, and asks whether it has ever 
been obtained in North Wales. It may interest him and others to know 
that an undoubted specimen was shot in Anglesea by one of a Pheasant: 
shooting party in the winter of 1899-1900, and is now in the collection of 
Mr. Stivens, of this city. Iam unable to say if it is likely to have been an 
imported bird.—W. Henry Dosiz (Chester). 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 557 


- The Mode of Progression of the Phalacrocoracide under Water.— 
In the Cambridge Natural History volume on Birds, I happened the other 
day to come across the following statment, @ propos of the method employed 
by the Phalacrocoracideé in swimming under water: “ Both wings and feet 
lending their aid to the performance.” As far as the Shag (Phalacrocorax 
graculus) is concerned—and it may, I think, be considered typical of the 
genus—this statement is at variance with my own experience in the Ork- 
neys, where I had the goud fortune to see the bird in the act of swimming 
below the surface. On the occasion to which I refer, we had rowed to a 
small cave, in and near which the Shags were breeding in considerable 
numbers. On the appearance of the boat at the cave-mouth, all the Shags 
(between thirty and forty) with one accord tumbled off the ledges, dived into 
the water, and made their way under the boat to the open sea beyond. The 
floor of the cave was composed of smooth white sand, and covered with 
about six feet of water, which made any mistake on our part practically 

‘impossible. Hvery Shag that passed under us swam with its wings close 
to its sides, and head and neck stretched well forward ; the feet alone were 
used in propelling the bird forward. Under certain conditions—as, for 
instance, in swimming in a confined area where collision with some object 
is possible, or in doubling after an active fish—I do not doubt that the wings 
are occasionally employed; but in a straight ‘‘run” ahead I feel certain 
that, as in the Colymbide, the feet alone are used. — A. H. MEIKLEJOHN 
(Highworth, Ashford, Kent). 


Gannet in Somersetshire. —I have lately discovered, in a friend’s 
house, a fine adult specimen of a Gannet (Sula bassana), concerning which 
the following particulars may prove of interest:—As long ago as 1890 a 
labourer found the bird asleep about a mile from this village, and, thinking 
it was a strayed Goose, attempted to pick it up. The bird resented 
being handled, and the man therefore killed it. Subsequently my friend 
obtained the bird, and had it preserved.mCHarLes B. HorsprueH (Mar- 
tock, Somerset). . 


Early Jack-Snipe.—When Grouse-shooting with Mr. Assheton Smith 
at Vaynol, North Wales, we twice flushed one of these birds (Gallinago 
gallinula) on Aug. 28th. This is the earliest date I have ever seen this 
bird in Britain.—J. Wuitaker (Rainworth Lodge, Notts). 


Pectoral Sandpiper in Suffolk—Mr. Arnold may be interested to 
know that his Pectoral Sandpiper (ante, p. 521) is the fourth specimen of 
Tringa maculata obtained in the county, all of which have occurred in the 
same locality. The first, shot by the late Mr. N. F’. Hele in Thorpe Mere, 
on Oct. 5th, 1870, is now in the Hele Collection in the Ipswich Museum ; 
the second was shot by myself not far from Thorpe Haven, Sept. 14th, 


558 THE ZOOLOGIST. 


1892, and is still preserved in our collection here; the third was shot by 
Mr, C. Clarke, of Aldeburgh, in what we used to call the “ First Mere,” 
Nov. 8th, 1883, but I am unable to say in whose possession it nowis. Our 
specimen was obtained quite by chance; three birds flew low over the mere 
within a long shot of me, and I fired at them, thinking them to be Curlew 
Sandpipers. A good many years have passed since then, but I well 
remember the intense delight with which I recognized my prize. It is just 
possible that Mr. Arnold’s bird may prove to be the Siberian Pectoral 
Sandpiper (Tringa acuminata), of which two specimens have been obtained 
in Norfolk (Zool. 1892, pp. 856, 405).—Jutian G. Tuck (Tostock Rectory, 
Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk). 


The Names of British Birds. — Mr. Meiklejohn’s notes on the names 
of British Birds are very interesting, but I am afraid that we must not 
allow it to be supposed that the name of the Fulmar has been borrowed 
from the Foumart or Foul Mart. That both the bird and mammal have a 
‘strong smell is true enough, but there the coincidence begins and ends. 
Fulmar is the Gaelic name of the bird, variously spelt, but derived from 
purely Gaelic sources (cf. Martin, ‘ Western Isles,’ p. 283; Gray, ‘ Birds 
of the West of Scotland,’ p. 499; Harvie-Brown and Buckley, ‘ A Fauna 
of the Outer Hebrides,’ p. 156; Newton, ‘ Dictionary of Birds,’ p. 295). 
References in support of this might be multiplied, but they are sufficiently 
obvious. ‘This Petrel is the Ice Petrel (Kis-Sturmvogel) of German ornitho- 
logists, and the Peétrel glacial of the French; but in Britain it is always 
recognized by its Gaelic name. — H. A. Macpuerson (The Rectory, 
Pitlochry). 


The Origin and Meaning of the Names of British Birds.—Mr. 
Meiklejohn’s paper revives the discussion of an interesting subject. A, 
valuable paper on the meaning of English Bird Names, by Mr. H. T. 
Wharion, is to be found in ‘The Zoologist’ for 1882, p. 441; and the 
same volume contains a note by Mr. Wharton on the etymology of Wigeon. 
Prof. Newton’s ‘ Dictionary of Birds’ may of course be consulted with great 
advantage, the derivation of many of the names being therein indicated, 
although the meaning of some of our bird-names seems very obscure. I 
should like to remark that Nuthatch means Nutcracker—hatch and crack 
being really the same. Pie (ante, p. 513) has surely some reference to the 
pied plumage of the Magpie and other birds. The Pied Woodpecker has been 
called the French Magpie, and Pie-Finch is a local name for the Chaffinch 
with conspicuous white about it. The connection between Pochard and 
Poacher sounds slighter when we remember that the ch in the former is 
hard, and that another form of the word is Poker. Is it not possible that 
the Knot may have been so called from its short, thick, chubby shape ? 
Gull and Guillemot have, I should think, different origins, and may be 


NOTES AND QUERIES. 559 


traced through the Welsh Gwylan and Gwilym. Buzzard may be traced 
through the French word buse. In reference to the bird’s stupid and 
sluggish habits, this has a second meaning of simpleton; hence, “On ne 
saurait faire d’une buse un épervier.”—O. V. APLIN. 


INSECTA. 
LEPIDOPTERA. 


Strange Hibernating Quarters for Vanessa io and V. urtice.— The 
inside of a church-bell is a quaint hibernating place for butterflies, but I 
recently (November) found one of the former and two of the latter inside 
the bell at Colton Chnrch, in Furness, North Lancashire. Their sleep 
must have been very deep to stand the sound caused by the clapper of the 
bell.— Harper GayTHorre (Prospect Road, Barrow-in-Furness). 


RHYNCHOTA. 


Enemies of the Cicadidea.—With reference to a recent conversation 
with the Editor on this subject, I can state that some of the large Asilide 
(Diptera) prey on Cicadide. At Trincomali (Ceylon), in November, 1890, I 
caught a specimen of Microstyliwm apicale preying ov a small cicadan 
(Tibicen nubifurca). Among the Diptera taken by Mr. Ogilvie Grant in 
Socotra is a specimen of a Promachus sp. caught feeding on a small 
cicadan. Probably both the Promachus and the cicadan will prove new to 
science.—J. W. YerBury (Army and Navy Club, Pall Mall, S.W.). 

[These unfortunate Cicadide, sometimes advanced in argument as in- 
stances of the advantage of “ protective resemblance,” but which, as already 
pointed out (Zool. 1897, p. 160), are alike preyed on by Birds, Spiders, 
Beetles, Wasps, Hornets, Dragonflies, Mantide, are, as stated above by 
Colonel Yerbury, also attacked by Diptera. They are attacked in the 
egg condition by larve of ichneumons, and also sometimes afflicted by a 
fungoid growth. In Japan they are eaten by Trout. On the other hand, 
Xenarchus long since wrote the ungallant couplet-— 

‘“* Happy the Cicada lives, 
Since they all have voiceless wives.” —Ep. | 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 


Mammalia of Surrey. — As we are compiling a catalogue of the Mam- 
malia of the above county, we should feel much indebted to any of your 
readers if they would draw our attention to any published or private notes 
relating to the subject, particularly with reference to the rarer species. Any 
communications may be addressed either to John A. Bucknill, Hylands 
House, Epsom, Surrey; or to H. W. Murray, F.Z.S., Woodcote Hall, 
Epsom, Surrey. 


560 | THE ZOOLOGIST. 


Index-Volume to New Generic Names in ‘ Zoological Record.’—The 
Council of the Zoological Society has given instructions for the publication 
of an Index-Volume to the new generic names mentioned in the ‘ Zoological 
Record,’ vols. xvii.-xxxvii. (1880-1900). The volumes previous to vol. xvii. 
have been indexed in the ‘ Nomenclator Zoologicus ’ of Scudder, published 
by the Smithsonian Institution in 1882. The contemplated Index-Volume 
of the ‘ Zoological Record,’ in order to increase its usefulness, will include 
names omitted from Scudder’s list, and from the volumes of the ‘ Zoological 
Record.’ Thus zoologists may have at their disposal (in the ‘ Nomenclator 
Zoologicus * and the new Index together) a complete list of all the names of 
genera and subgenera used in zoology up to the end of 1900. It is earnestly 
requested that anyone who knows of names omitted from Scudder’s ‘ Nomen- 
clator,’ or from the volumes of the ‘ Zoological Record,’ will forward a note 
of them, together, if possible, with a reference as to where they have been 
noticed or proposed, so that the new list may be made practically complete. 
Such information should be addressed to the Editor of the ‘ Zoological 
Record,’ 3, Hanover Square, London, W.; or to C. O. Waterhouse, Esq., 
British Museum (Natural History), South Kensington, London, who is 
engaged in compiling the list. 


British Snakes.—lI should be very grateful to readers of ‘ The Zoolo- 
gist’ for their help in the preparation of a work I have in hand on our 
Bnitish Snakes. Particularly I would ask for the relative frequency of the 
Adder and Ring-Snake, and their average lengths in each reader’s locality. 
—GERALD LeEteHToN (Grosmont, Pontrilas, near Hereford). 


og ak ice Sal aa la ota ds See 

A iii nary nT LIBRARY | 

Aca 
3 1853 10007 5675 


a if 
Len & 


>> — 


'1z> 
we 


Se ee 


MONS ta i Wel ye 
Ne: \ URN: sis 
i wees thi 


ne Ray ‘ 


» 


2 
: — 


4 { 
:s 
at 
1 
1) ahe 
Pomel 
Ohk 
, be 
‘ HY 
Vink 
if _ ay 
LP a 4 


. 
| 
xy 
RA. 


Pave. 
ma — = 22 
ast gem, 
roe 
4 _ ~ ww 
x C oe 
tn a