Birds THE flviealtaral fllaaazine BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY OF FOREIGN AND BRITISH BIRDS Edited by H. R. FILUMER, Under the Direction of the Executive Committee of the Council. VOL. V. NOVEMBER, 1S9S, to OCTOBER, 1899. 2Loii£>on : BETTS & SONS, Ltd., 2, Gray’s Inn Place, W.C. 1899. EXPLANATION OF FOOTNOTES. Most of the footnotes in this volume signed with initials were written by Members of the Executive Committee : A. G. B.=Arthur G. Butler. E. G. B. M.-W.=E. G. B. Meade-Waedo. R. P.=Reginaed Phieeeips. D. S.-S.=David Seth-Smith. Mr. Phieeipps resigned early in the year, and Mr. Meade- Waedo was elected in his stead. ERRATUM . Page 126, line 5 , for Nearling read Nehrling. INDEX TO AUTHORS, Aldekson, Miss R. Notes on my Shamah ... PAGE . 132 Fulmer H. R. page Crystal Palace Show of October, Ashford. Miss Grace Breeding' Avadavats ... ... 24 Aviary-bred Avadavats ... 59 Astley, Rev. H. D., F.Z.S. Breeding Virginian Cardinals ... 5 Doves and Soft-billed Birds at the Crystal Palace Show ... 19 Swallows in Cages ... ... 22 Notes on the Rock Thrush in Captivity ... ... 50 Sex of Pennants ... ... 189 Bdtler, A. G., Ph.D., etc. Impossible Mules ... ... 20 On the Ornamentation of the Mouth of the young Gouldian Finch ... ... ... 27 The Madagascar Weaver ... 57 Notes on West African Birds ... 60 The Wild Canary ... ... 75 Sycnlis arvensis ... ... 79 Wells’ Ground Dove ... ... 95 The Blue Sugar-bird ... ... 113 Waxwing and Persian Bulbul ... 119 Blue-bearded Jay ... ... 122 Licensing of Bird-catchers ... 123 Review of “ Captive Song-Birds ” 147 A Yellow-fronted Amazon ... 161 The Spotted Panther-bird ... 180 The Chinese Bulbul ... ... 184 Dried Flies ... ... ... 36 Some Fallacies ... ... 38 The Limits of Legitimate Avi¬ culture ... ... ... 54 The Proposed Licensing of Bird- catchers... ... ... 80 Foreign Birds (other than Parrots) at the Crystal Palace Show ... 90 The Licensing of Bird-catchers 109 Ages attained by Birds in Captivity hi Resignation of the Secretary .’. 112 Blue Sugar-bird ... ... 120 Protection of Birds ... ... 120 The Magazine ... ... 140 The Orange-winged Amazon ... 183 The Sex of Pennants ... ... 190 Finn, F\, B.A., F.Z.S. Notes on Seasonal Change of Plumage 41 Notes on various species of Grebes 102 Notes and Queries ... ... 192 Tortoises ... ... ... 194 Fuli.james, Henry J. The “Long-tailed Combasou”.,. 71 The Blue Sugar-bird ; The Emerald Bird of Paradise ... 138 The Princess of Wales’s Parrakeet 168 Cartmell, I. Parrot Finches and their Foster- Parents ... ... 135 Catleugh, W. T. Dried Flies ... ... ... 77 Grass-seeds for Waxbills ... 99 The Age of Cage-birds ... 167 Cocksedge, E. Le H. Sex of Pennants ... ... 190 Cresswell, O. E. The Madagascar Weaver ... 35 Notes on my Doves in 1898 ... 66 Doves, Parrots, and Parrakeets at the Crystal Palace Show ... 93 Mimicry by Birds in a wild state 116 My Aviaries... ... ... 152 Daly, E. D. H. Red-headed Finch ... ... 34 Hybrids ... ... ... 39 Dutton, The Hon. & Rev. F. G. Parrots at the Crystal Palace Show ... ... ... 13 Parrot Notes— Amazons 44, 83. 128 A Feather-eating Parrot ... 75 Blossom-headed Parrakeet ... 120 The Magazine ... ... 152 Faemborough, Percy W., F.Z.S. On the Jay as a Cage-bird ... 52 Farrar, The Rev. C. I). Breeding Virginian Cardinals ... 2 Breeding Operations at Micklefield in 1898 ... 23 Some Fallacies ... ... 37 The Long-tailed Combasou 39, 72 Bicheno's or Double-bandedFinch 107 Crimson Finch ... ... 112 Catching a Tartar .. ... 136 Nesting of the Dhyal ... ... 145 ,, ,, Nonpareil ... 163 ,, ,, Pennant ... 176 ,, ,, Crimson-wing ... 193 Grace, G. Le C. Sex of Pennants ... ... 188 Harrison, C. Mimicry by Birds in a Wild State 137 Hartley, Mrs. E. A. H. An Invitation ... ... 120 Ages attained by Birds in Captivity 120 Hawkins, L. W. Pytelia melba and P. a fra ... 164 Hett, Chas. Louis A Weasel in the Aviary ... 74 To Amateur Photographers ... 93 Hodgson, Miss C. Crimson Finches and Rufous - tailed Finches ... ... 100 Ages attained by Birds in Captivity... 121 Horsbrugh, Boyd Birds of Kumasi, West Africa ... 163 Housden, James B. Rose-coloured Pastors ... 40 Crimson P'inches ... ... 58 Bird Notes ... ... ... 149 Jones, Arthur The Licensing of Bird-catchers 109, 123, 135 The American Mocking-bird ... 167 Lancaster, Mrs., M, B. The Sex of Pennants ... ... 190 Mhade-Waldo, E. G. B. Breeding of the Chinese Painted Quail ... ... ... 1 The Ages to which Birds attain in Confinement ... ... 81 The Siberian Jay ... ... 101 Nesting of the Scops Owl ... 139 Index to Authors — continued. Nicholson, \V. page The Song'S of Tanagers ... 33 OAK.EY, W. Classes for common Waxbills, etc. 40 Oates, F. W. Travelling-cages for Doves ... 99 Sex of Pennants . _ •• 188 Observations on Breeding' ... 192 OSBALDKSTON, W. Crimson Finch, etc. ... ■■■ 72 Toucans ... ... ••• 85 Page. W. T., F.Z.S. Period of Moulting and Assump¬ tion of Breeding Plumage of the Common Avadavat ... 162 Pearson, A. A. The Madagascar Weaver ... 57 Some Continental Birds ... 59 Madagascar Weaver ... .. 77 Rufous-necked Weaver ... 78 Orange and Crimson Bishops ... 78 Perkins, Septimus The Blackcap as an Aviary-bird 70 Phillipps, R. Parrot Finches ... ... 2* The Tail of the Indian Shamah... 32 The European Roller ... ... 46 The “ Dong-tailed Combasou ” ... 59 The Indian Roller ... ... 64 The Cordon -bleu ... ... 141 The Tortoise and the Toad . . 152 The Golden-shouldered Parrakeet 157 The Black Dark ... ... 169 The Blue-fronted Amazon ... 185 Roberts, Norman B. The Spotted Panther-bird ... 179 Savage, A. Breeding Redrumps ... ... 28 Rufous-tailed Grassfiuch ... 96 Bird Notes ... ... ... 150 Blue Robins... ... ... 192 Seth-Smith, D., F.Z.S. page British Birds at the Crystal Palace Show ... ... 8 Crossbills ... ... ... 24 Nesting of the Diamond Dove ... 35 The Rufous-tailed Grassfiuch ... 61 British Birds at the Crystal Palace Show ... ... 87 The Diceusing of Bird-catchers... 98 Photographing Birds ... ... no The American Siskin ... ... 125 P'ood for Waterfowl ... ... 136 Dord Derby’s Parrakeet ... 144 Simpson, C. S., D. R. C. P.. etc. Foreign Finches at the Crystal Palace Show ... ... 15 The Madagascar Weaver ... 57 Crimson Finches ... ... 58 Sherbrooke, Mrs., R. Age of Cage Birds ... ... 193 St. Quintin, W. H. Parrot Finches ... ... 20 Breeding Experiences ... 72 The Rufous-tailed Grassfiuch ... 97 Eider Ducks in Captivity ... 115 Breeding Results ... ... 182 Swaii.es, G. C. Bearded Tits ... ... 165 Thom, A. A. Seasonal changes of plumage ... 135 Todd, R. a. Aviary Notes ... ... 75 Notes on various species ... 180 West, Miss E. E. The Age of Cage-birds ... 150 The Story of a Blue-Robin’s Nest 151 INDEX TO NESTING NOTES. Avadavat Blue Robin Bullfinch, Trumpeter Cardinal, Virginian Cherry-finch Chough, Cornish Columba laurivora Cordon-bleu Crimson Finch ... Dhyal Bird Diuca Finch Dove, Diamond ... ,, Necklaced ,, Bronze-nape Duck, Eider Dwarf-finch Gouldiau Finch... Hybrids — Canary— Saffron Fii Red-headed Finch — Ribbon Finch 34 Alario Finch— Canary ... .. 59 Grey-necked Serin Finch— Canary 59 Blue Senegal Dove — Necklace Dove 69 Carolina drake— Mandarin duck ... 73 Fancy Pigeon — Zanzibar Half- collared Dove ... ... 149 Spice Bird— Bengalese ... ... 194 page Dark, Black ... 169 Dong-tailed Grassfiuch ... ... 182 Dove Bird, Peach-faced ... 190 Mynah, Malabar ... 23 Mocking-bird, American ... 23 Nonpareil 76, 165 Owl, Scops 159, 183 ,, Snowy 72> 183 Parrakeet, Crimson-wing 23, i93 ,, Golden-shouldered ... 158 „ King 23, 190 ,, Mealy Rosella • i93 ,, Pennant’s ... 176 ,, Redrump 23, 28 ,, Kedmantled ... ... 190 ,, Rosella ... 190 Parrot Finches ... 20, 21, 135, 182 Quail, Chinese Painted ... 1, 182, 193 Rufous-tailed Grassfiuch ... 62, 97 Sandgrouse 73 183 Swan, Whooper ... ■■■ 73 Waterfowl 73 Waxbill, Zebra ... 2 3 page .. 24 2. 5 • •• 73 74 23, 141, 182 ... 100 145 76 35. 74, 183 ... 69 ... 69 73, 115, i83 74, 182 THE FOR THE STUDY OF FOREIGN AND BRITISH BIRDS. OFFICERS FOR THE YEAR 1898-9. president : THE HON. & REV. F. G. DUTTON. Wice=presidents : the RIGHT HON. THE BARONESS BERKELEY. SIR H. S. BOYNTON, BART. Council : The Rev. H. D. ASTLEY. Mr. J. L. BONHOTE. Dr. A. G. BUTLER. Mr. H. J. FULLJAMES. Mr. T. MARSHALL. Mr. E. G. B. MEADE-WALDO. Mr. R. PHILLIPPS. Mr. D. SETH-SMITH. Dr. C. S. SIMPSON. Mr. W. H. St. QUINTIN. Mr. G. C. SWAILES. Mr. R. A. TODD. Dr. A. G. BUTLER. Executive Committee : Mr. R. PHILLIPPS. Mr. D. SETH-SMITH. Ibon. Secretary : Mr. H. R. FILLMER, 52, Ship Street, Brighton. treasurer : Mr. O. E. CRESSWELL, Momey Cross, near Hereford. Scrutineer : Mr. C. L. ROTHERA, Nottingham. auditor : Mr. W. SWAYSLAND. JSanfcers : Messrs. BARCLAY & COMPANY, Limited, Union Bank, Brighton. LIST OF MEMBERS. Corrected to November ist. i8q8. The date following the member’s name is the date of his election. “ Orig. Mem.” signifies that the member joined the Society on its formation in October, 1894. The asterisk denotes that the member belonged to the U. K. Foreign Cage Bird Society, either at the time of its amalgamation with the Avicultural Society or at some time before. Abrahams, Mr. Joseph, 191 and 192, St. George Street, London, E- (May, 1895). * Adamson, Miss, Rushton Park, Battle, Sussex. (May, 1897). AGGS, Mr. H. Gurney, Pippbrook, Dorking. (Oct., 1S97). AineEY, Mr. John Wieeiam, 16, Dalton Green, Dalton, Huddersfield. (June, 1S95). * AEDERSON, Miss R., Park House, Worksop. (April, 1896). AEEBUTT, Mrs., 24, Park Square, Leeds. (Jan., 1897). AppeEFORD, Airs., West Hill House, Hoddesdon, Herts. (March, 1897). Arthur, Air. C. P., Market Place, Melksham. (Jan., 1895). * Ashford, Miss Grace, The Birks, Brauksome Wood Road, Bournemouth. (Nov., 1896). ASTEEY, Rev. H. D., M.A., F.Z.S., Cheker’s Court, Butler’s Cross S.O., Bucks. (June, 1895). * Austen, Mr. Ernest E., 104, Alinet Avenue, Harlesden, N.W. (Orig. Mem.) Baker, Mr. L. Ingham, Eastcoat Lodge, Pinner. (Dec., 1896). Bamford, Miss Eeea C., St. Cuthbert Leys, Bedford. (June, 1895). '* Baxter, Mrs., Ivy House, Abbey Street, Burton-on-Trent. (Nov., 1897). BEEDZEER, Air. John, 20, Norton Folgate, Loudon, E.C. (Jan., 189S). BEEE, The Rev. Canon, D.D., Loughrigg Brow, Ambleside. (June, 1895). BENTEEY, Mr. David, 80, St. Hubert Street, Great Harwood, nr. Blackburn. (July, 1S95). BERKEEEY, The Baroness, Martin’s Heron, Bracknell, Berks. (Dec., 1894). BETTS, Air. W. H., F.L.S., F.Z.S., 36, Great James Street, Bedford Row, W.C. (Orig. Mem.) * Beackburn, Miss, Dolforgan, Exmouth. (June, 1895). Beackett, Captain Haroed, Pine Wood, Sunning Hill Village, Berks. (Alarch, 1898). BeaThwayt, Mr. A. P., Frogmore, Watford, Herts. (Jan., 1895). BonhoTE, Mr. J. Lewis, Waterbeach, Cambridgeshire. (Dec., 1894). Booth, Mr. Frank, North Bar Without, Beverley. (May, 1S97). BosanqueT, Mr. Eustace F., Steeple Ashton House, near Trowbridge. (Alarch, 1897;. BOTTOMEEY, Air. W. McC., India Buildings, Halifax. (Dec., 1S94). * Bouskiee, Air. George E., The Hollies, Buxton Road, Stockport. (April, 1896). Boynton, Sir H. S., Bart., Burton Agnes, Hull. (Jan., 1S95). Brampton, Aliss E., The Aloat House, Brentwood, Essex. (Feb., 1898), Brigg, Air. Staneey, Bod-Alaw, Llandudno, N, Wales. (Orig. Mem.) Ill, BrodiE, Mr. Charges, Thornton Loch, Innerwick, Bast Lothian. (Jan., 1896). Brooksbank, Mrs. A. H., Caunton Manor, Newark-on-Trent. (May, 1898). BroTHERSTON, Mr. G. M., Comiston Drive, Edinburgh. (Feb., 1895). Brown, Mr. G. A., 111, North Street, Brighton. (Orig. Mem.) Browne, Miss Agnes M., 19, Rowland Gardens, London, S.W. (July, 1895). Buckxand, Dr. Francis O., 10, Fgerton Place, London, S.W. (Dec., 1S94). BueeivanT, Mr. Thomas Peeham, 45, Via di Monserrato, Rome. (July, 1898). Buestrode, Mr. C. V., Hedgerley Lodge, Madingley Road, Cambridge. (Nov., 1896). BurdiTT, Mr. W. F., Elmhurst, 23, Crosby Road, Birkdale, Southport. (06t., 1898). Burge, Mr. Samuee, Ivy Cottage, Fairford. (Nov., 1896). BuTEER, Dr. A. G., F.L.S., F.Z.S., 124, Beckenham Road, Beckenham, Kent. (Orig. Mem.) * Camps, Mr. H. T. T., F.Z.S., Linden House, Haddenham, Isle of Fly. (Orig. Mem.) * Capee, The Hon. Mrs. R., Moneyhill, Rickmansworth. (August, 189S). Carpenter, The Hon. Mrs., Kiplin, Northallerton. (Feb., 1898). Carpmaee, Miss, The Ivies, St. Julian’s Farm Road, West Norwood. (April, 1896). Carrick, Mr. George, Strathearn Cottage, Saltcoats, Ayrshire, N.B. (March, 1898). Carter, Mr. Waeter L., Summergate Villa, Parkinson Lane, Halifax. (June, 1895). * CarTMEEE, Mr. J., 32, Vauxhall Road, Preston, Lancashire. (June, 1S95). * Casteeean, Mr. Victor, Hare Hall, Romford, Essex. (Orig. Mem.) CaTEEUGh, Mr. W. T., Donnington Road, Newbury, Berks. (Dec., 1S94). Caush, Mr. D. F-, 63, Grand Parade, Brighton. (Orig. Mem.) Chambereain, Mrs. D’FyncourT, Twynham, Christchurch Road, Bournemouth. (Feb., 1897). Chapman, Mr. P. Godfrey, Congham House, King’s Lynn. (061., 1898). Charrington, Mrs. Mowbray, The Warren, Hever, Edenbridge, Kent. (May, 1896). Cearke, Mrs. ChareES, National Training School of Cookery, 72-78, Buckingham Palace Road, S.W. (Dec., 1894). Cocksedge, Mr. F. LE Houp, Beyton Grange, Suffolk. (March, 1898). Coeeier, Miss Constance L., 210, Adelaide Road, South Hampstead. N.W. (April, 1898). Comyns, Mr. J. H., B.A., Oxon., Lyveden, Newton Abbot, South Devon. (Jan., 1897). Conneee, Mrs. A. KnaTCHBUEE, The Hermitage, Godaiming. (Nov., 1S97). Cook, Mr. Frank, Sunny Mount, Lincoln. (Feb., 1867). Cooper, Mr. James, Killerby Hall, Scarborough. (Orig. Mem.) Cox, Mr. G. H., 42, London Road, Leicester. (061., 1898). Craeer, Mr. Aefred, 6, Dyke Road, Brighton. (Dec., 1894). CREE, Miss E. J., Ingleside, Lenzie, Glasgow. (Jan., 1895). Creighton, Mr. R., Likoma House, Belle Vue Street, P'iley. (Sept. 1897). Cressweee, Mr. O. F-, J.P., Morney Cross, near Hereford. (Orig. Mem.) Cronkshaw, Mr. J., 85, Plantation Street, Accrington. (Dec., 1S94). iv. Cummings, Mr. Alexander, i6, Promenade Villas, Cheltenham. (Dec., 1896). Cushny, Mr. Charees, Pain’s Hill, Cobliam, Surrey. (June, 1896). Dare, Dr. F., Park Lee, Scarborough. (Dec., 1S94). * Dary, Mr. Edward D. H., (late Lieut., Bengal Staff Corps), Cavell’s Cottage, The Purlieu, Hythe, Southampton. (Dec., 1895). Devas, Mr. George, Hartfield, Hayes, Kent. (Oct., 189S). Dewar, Mr. J. F., 2, St. Patrick’s Square, Edinburgh. (Orig. Mem.) * DinGwerr, Mrs., Knollys Croft, Leigliam Court Road, Streatham, S.W. (August, 1898). Doherty, Mr. John, 6, Broomwood Road, Wandsworth Common, S.W. (June, 1896). Duncombe, The Hon. Mrs., The Grange, Nawton R. S. O., Yorks. (April, 1S97). Dunreath, The Lady, Ballywalter Park, Ballywalter, co. Down. (Aug., 1S97). Dutton, The Hon. and Rev. F. G., Bibury, Fairford. (Orig. Mem.) Dyson, Miss F., 3, Donnington Villas, Newbury, Berks. (Feb., 1S98). Edwards, Miss K., 140, Lower Addiscombe Road, Croydon. (March, 1898). Edwards, Mr. Wirriam, Abergele Road, Colwyn Bay, North Wales. (March, 1S98). Farmborough, Mr. Percy W., F.Z.S., The Public Library, Edmonton. (June, 1896). * Farrar, The Rev. C. D., Micklefield Vicarage, South Milford, Yorks. (Jan., 1895). Farrar, Mr. H. Crawharr, Bourn Terrace, Hartlepool. (Jan., 1S95). Fife, Mrs., Langton Hall, Northallerton. (Oct., 189S). FiRRMER, Mr. H. R., Brendon, Harrington Road, Brighton. (Orig. Mem.)* FiRRMER, Mrs. W., Woodside, Harrington Road, Brighton. (Orig. Mem.) Finn, Mr. F., B.A., F.Z.S., Indian Museum, Calcutta. (March, 1895). FiSHER, The Rev. Wirfred, Parklands, Lustleigh, Newton Abbot. (Dec., 1S94). FrinT, Mr. J. L-, 9, Donnington Square, Newbury. (Feb., 1S97). FowrER, Mr. Charres, 26, Broad Street, Blaeuavou. (Dec., 1S94). Fox, Mr. C. J., 35, Addington Street, Ramsgate, Kent. (M'ay, T897). Francis, Mrs., The Manor House, Richmond, S.W. (June, 1896). Frankrin-Hindre, Mr. R., 13, Regent Road, Birkdale, Southport. (Sept. 1S98). Frostick, Mr. John, 126, Ramsden Road, Balham, S.W. (Orig. Mem.) * Furrjames, Mr. Henry J., Brooklyn, Elmbourne Road, Bedford Hill, Balham, S.W. (April, 1895). Gabrier, Mrs. G., 32, Palace Road, Streatham Hill. (June, 1S95). Gibbins, Mr. Wirriam B., Ettington, Stratford-on-Avon. (June, 1895). * Gibbins, Mr. Fredk. W., Neath, South Wales. (Oct., 1S97). Gibson, The Rev. Thomas B., A.M., The Rectory, Ferns, co. Wexford. (Feb., 1896). GiRRETT, Miss A. K., Duffield Bank House, Derby. (Nov., 1S97). GOODFERROW, Mr. Warter, 13, Brunswick Square, Loudon, W. C. (June, 1S97). V. Grace, Mr. Gustave LE Carpentier, 24, Wood Street, Wakefield. (March, 1896). GREEN, Mr. Albert, 4, Cumnor Terrace, Bournemouth. (Feb., 1898). Griffiths, Mr. E., Brislington House, Bristol. (Orig. Mem.) Griggs, Dr. W. A., 77 and 79, High Cross Street, Leicester. (Oct. 1898). Hamilton, Mrs., Bannerdown House, Batheastou, Bath. (Feb., 1895). Hammond, Mrs. W. A., 2, Eaton Gardens, Hove. (Orig. Mem). HarbotteE, Miss, Meadowside, Victoria Place, Budleigh Salterton, Devon. (Dec., 1895). Hardinge, The Hon. Lady, Le Petite Maison, Costie-Belle, Hyers, Var, France. (Nov., 1896). HarkER, Mr. T. P., Tichfield, Clermont Terrace, Preston, near Brighton. (Orig. Mem). Harrison, Mr. C. L., Woodhayne, Honiton, Devon. (May, 1895). Harrison, Miss Edith, Waterhouse, Bath. (Sept., 1895). Hartley, Mrs., St. Helen’s Lodge, Hastings. (April, 1897). Henwood, Mr. T. E., Auricula Villa, Hamilton Road, Reading. (Dec., 1894). HETT, Mr. Charles Louis, Springfield, Brigg. (Jan., 1S96). Hitchins, Mr. Martin F., Trevarriclc, St. Austell. (Jan., 1897). Hodgson, Miss, Hernewood, Sevenoaks. (Dec., 1894). * Hope, Colonel C. E., Hillside, Shanklin, Isle of Wight. (May, 1897). Hopson, Mr. F. C., Northbrook Street, Newbury. (March, 1897). HorSBRUGh, Lieutenant B., Arm}' Service Corps, Sierra Leone, W. Africa. (Jan., 1898). HoueTON, Mr. Charles, Denton’s Green Lane, St. Helen’s. (Feb., 1897). Housden, Mr. J. B., Brooklyn, Cator Road, Sydenham. (Orig. Mem.) Howman, Miss, 7S, Westow Hill, Upper Norwood. (March, 1897). Hudson, Mr. A. F., 3, Hove Place, Hove. (Orig. Mem.) Hughes, Mrs., 1, Merton Terrace, Brighton Road, Worthing. (April, 1895). Hughes, Ml-. Frank P., 5, Museum Street, Leicester. (Sept. 1S98). Humphrys, Mr. RUSSELL, Lingdale, Bickley, Kent. (April, 1896). Husband, Miss, Clifton View, 'York. (Feb., 1S96). HuTT, Mr. Henry T., 24, Cockspur Street, London, S.W. (Nov., 1896). Jackson, Mrs. James, Dauecourt, Parkstone, Dorset. (Orig. Mem.) JENNISON, Mr. George, Devonport Park, Stockport. (Sept., 1897). Jones, Mr. Norman H., Glasmoor, Victoria Road, Bridlington Quay. (Orig. Mem.) * Jones, Mr. Arthur, 85, .Sidney Road, Homerton. (June, 1S95). King, Mr. J. B., Annandale House, Glebe, Kilmarnoch. (Oct., 1896). KEENE, Mrs., 39, Hough Green, Chester. (Feb., 1897). Kneen, Mr. T. E., 92, Harrington Road, Workington. (June, 1S95). * Lamb, Mrs. R. O., West Denton, Scotswood-on-Tyne. (March, 1898). Lancaster, Mrs., Burnside, Walsall. (August, 1S97). Landless, Mr. W., Portland Villa, Waterloo Road, Ashton - on - Ribble, Preston. (Dec., 1896). LASCELLES, The Hon. Gerald W., Queen’s House, Lyndhurst. (Oct., 1896). Law, Mr. Evelyn C., Kingswear, Fairfax Road, Teddington, Middlesex. (Dec., 1897). VI. Lawrence, Mr. J. I., Fanciers’ Publishing Co., Worcester, Mass., U.S.A. (Oct., 1897). Lawson, Dr. H., The Homestead, Chisleliurst Hill, Kent. (Aug., 1896). LeadbeaTER, Mr. F. W., 215, London Road, Sheffield. (Dec., 1894). LEadbetter, Mr. Richard, 21, Trinity Road, Penge. (Dec., 1S94). LEGH DE LEGH, Dr. H., Redcar, Yorks. (March, 1896). Lennie, Mr. Joseph C., Rose Park, Trinity Road, Edinburgh. (Orig. Mem.) * Lieford, The Lady, Lilford Hall, Oundle, Northamptonshire. (Jan., 189S). LEEWEEYN, Miss, 188, Earl’s Court Road, London, S.W. (Orig. Mem.) * Long, Mrs. Hume, Dolforgau, Exmouth. (June, 1895). Long, Miss Muriee M. L., Woodhouse, Chudleigh, S. Devon. (Feb., 1898). Lott, Mr. W. A., 8, Lansdowne Road, Stockwell. (Oct., 1895). Low, Mrs., Kilshane, Tipperary, Ireland. (Feb. 1895). Lydon, Mr. A. F., 11, Woodstock Road, Bedford Park, Chiswick. (June, 1895). Lynch, Mr. Cyrie, 45, Rua Dr. Correa, Cattete, Rio de Janiero, Brazil. (April, 1897). Lyon, Lieut- Col. F. L- H., R.A., J.P., Harwood, Horsham. (Nov., 1894). MacGavin, Dr. John, Trafalgar House, Trafalgar Road, Greenwich. (June, 1898). Marsh, Mrs., 49, Sackville Road, Hove. (Dec., 1894). Marshaee, Mr. Thomas, The Grange, 128, High Street, Poplar, E. (Dec., 1894). Martin, Mr. H. C., 16, Victoria Road, Old Charlton, S.E. (Jan., 1897). Maxweee, Mr. C. T., South Lawn, 24, Acre Lane, Brixton, S.W. (Mar., 1S96). McCorquodalE, Mrs., Gadlys, Llansadwrn, Isle of Anglese}\ (May, 1898). MeadE-Waedo, Mr. Pi. G. B., Stonewall Park, Edenbridge, Kent. (Jan., 1895). Micheee, Mrs., Crakehall, Bedale, Yorkshire. (Sept., 1898). MOERSCHEEE, Mr. F., Imperial Hotel, Malvern. (June, 1895). Morshead, Lady, Forest Lodge, Binfield, Bracknell, Berks. (Dec., 1S94). * Mortimer, Mrs., Wigmore, Holmwood, Surrey. (Orig. Mem.) * MurgaTroyd, Mr. J. W., Ash Brook, Heaton, Bradford. (May, 1896). Nichoeson, Mr. Aefred E., 52, Havmarket Terrace, Edinburgh. (Oct., 1896) * Nichoeson, Mr. W., 67, High West Street, Gateshead. (Feb., 1898). OakEY, Mr. W., 46, High Street, Leicester,. (March, 1896). * Oates, Mr. F. W., White House Farm, New Leeds, Leeds. (Oct., 1897). O’Brien, The Hon. Mrs., Moor Park, Ludlow. (Nov., 1897). OEIVER, Dr. G. H., Station Road, Clayton, Bradford. (Feb., 1S97). O’Reieey, Mr. Nicholas S., 9, Royal Crescent, Ramsgate, Kent. (Dec., 1894). Osbaedeston, Mr. W., 2, St. John Street, Preston, Lancashire. (June, 1895). * Owen, Mr. J. A., 41, King’s Road, Brighton. (April, 1895). Page, Mr. Weseey T., 6, Rylett Crescent, Shepherd’s Bush, London, W. (May, 1S97). vii. PEARSON, Mr. A. A., 95, Victoria Road, Headingley, Leeds. (Nov., 1897). Perkins, Mr. Septimus, Woodford House, Queen’s Park Road, Brighton. (Orig. Mem.) PERRING, Mr. C. S. R., 144A, Queen Victoria Street, London, E. C. (Sept., 1895). Phireipps, Mr. R., 26, Cromwell Grove, West Kensington Park, London, W. (Orig. Mem.) * Phireipps, Mrs. R., 26, Cromwell, Grove, West Kensington Park, London, W. (Orig. Mem.) Phirripps, Mr. Arexander T. L-, Port Said, Egypt. (Dec., 1S94). PhirrpoTTS, Miss Constance, Elmhurst, Canterbury. (Feb., 1897). PiTT, Dr. G. Newton, 15, Portland Place, W. (Dec., 1894). PiTT, Mrs., The Nest, Torquay. (Dec., 1894). Promrey, Dr. J. F., Kuightrider House, Maidstone. (Feb., 1898). Poor, Mr. J. C., Carr’s Lane, Birmingham. (Orig. Mem.) POYSER, Mr. Edwin J., F.Z.S., Dunburgh House, Geldeston, Beccles. (Aug., 1897). RairTON, Mr. R. J., Brampton House, Longley Road, Tooting. (April 1897). Reay, Mr. John Henry Arfred, 7, Rosemont, Wallington, Surrey. (April, 1898). Reid, Mrs., Funchal, Madeira. (Feb., 1895). Reid, Mr. Wirriam, 26, Fountainhall Road, Edinburgh. (Dec., 1894). Renant, Mr. W. E., The Brambles, Elmbourne Road, Tooting Common, S.W. (April, 1897). ReTTICH, Mr. A., 10, Northanger Road, Streatham Common, S. W. (July, 1895). Richard, Mr. E., Hotel Metropole, Brighton. (Orig. Mem.) * Roberts, Mr. Norman B., Aslidell Cottage, Sheffield. (Feb., 1898). Robinson, Miss H. M., The Newlands, Leamington Spa. (Orig. Mem.) ROGERS, Miss G. Coxwerr, Park Gate, Cheltenham. (Dec., 1S95). Rotch, Mr. Craude D., 3, Beach Lawn, Waterloo, near Liverpool. (June, 1S97). Rothera, Mr. C. L., B. A., Hazlewood, Forest Grove, Nottingham. (July, 1895). Rowe, Lady, Bridge Hall Farm, Burgess Hill, Sussex. (Dec., 1895). Sart, Dr. E. G., 50, George Square, Edinburgh. (July, 1895). Savage, Mr. A., 3, Rue Bihorel, Bihorel, Rouen, Seine Inferieure, France. (April, 1895). Savege, Dr. George, 24, Railway Street, Beverley. (Oct., 1896). Scrivens, Miss, Millfield, Bexhill-on-Sea, Sussex. (July, 1895). Seaman, Mrs., 30, Elvastou Place, Queen’s Gate, S.W. (May, 1897). Secretary, The, Natural History Society, Rugby School, Rugby. (Orig. Mem.) SERGEANT, Mr, J., 10, London Street, Southport. (Orig. Mem.) * Seth-Smith, Mr. David, Wilford House, 22, ShornclifFe Road, Folkestone. (Dec., 1894). Sharp, Miss, M.D., Spring Gardens, Ringwood, Hants. (Orig. Mem.) Sherbrooke, Mrs. K, Keldholme Priory, Kirkbymoorside, Yorkshire. (March, 1897). Simpson, Dr. C. S., 2, Portland Road, Hove. (Orig. Mem.) * vm. SlVEWRiGHT, Miss H. A., The Rise, Headington Hill, Oxford. (Dec., 1895). SeaTER, Mr. Arthur a., Windleshaw House, St. Helen’s. (Nov., 1894). Smart, Mr. John, 12, Royal Crescent, Edinburgh. (Nov., 1894). Smith, Mr. H. B., Grangefield, Park Road South, Birkenhead. (June, 1895).* Smith, Mr. A. C., Broad Street, Bungay. (Feb., 1896). * Smith, Mr. E. E., 133, Alderson Road, Sheffield. (Odt., 1898). Speed, Mr. ChareES, 42, Garth Road, Bangor. (Dec., 1894). ST. QuinTin, Mr. W. H., Scampston Hall, Rillington, York. (Orig. Mem.) Staines, Mr. E. p., II2, Woodbine Grove, Penge. (May^, 1897). STansfeed, Mr. John, Dunninald, Montrose, N.B. (Dec., 1896). StanyeorTH, Mrs., Kirk Hanimerton Hall, York. (Nov., 1897). Story, Mr. J., 7, Blenheim Terrace, St. John’s Wood, N.W. (Orig. Mem.)* STURTON-JOHNSON, Miss, Ortava House, Ore, Hastings. (May, 1897). SwaieES, Mr. GEORGE C., Beverley, Yorkshire. (June, 1895). Swayseand, Mr. WaeTER, 184, Western Road, Brighton. (Orig. Mem.) * SwinFEn-Broun, Mrs. Eaura, Swinfen Hall, Richfield. (Feb., 1S9S). Tate, Mr. Aean, 229, Allen Street, Sheffield. (Jnne, 1897). Tayeor, Mr. E., 22, Thornton’s Arcade, Reeds. (June, 1895). * Thom, Mr. A. A., Birkacre House, Birkacre, near Chorley. (June, 1895). * Thomas, Mr. Henry, 78, Harlow Terrace, Harrogate. (Jan., 1895). Thomasset, Mr. Bernard C., West Wickham, by Beckenham, Kent. (July, 1896). Thompson, Mr. Arthur H., St. Medard’s, Darlington. (May, 1895). Thompson, Mrs. WaedEGrave, St. Brelade’s, Rivercourt Road, Hammersmith, W. (Dec., 1895). Thoyts, Miss E. E., Sulhampstead Park, Berkshire. (Nov., 1894). * Thursby, Mrs., Bank Hall, Burnley. (June, 1895). * Tinne, Mrs. J. C., Bashleigli Rodge, Rymington, Hants. (Sept. 1S9S). Todd, Mr. R. A., Honeyden, Foot’s Cray, Kent. (June, 1895). Topham, Mr. Wieliam, The Hill, Spondon, Derby. (Feb., 1895). * Townend, Mr. Frank H., 26, Dornton Road, South Croydon, Surrey. (May, 1895). * Townsend, Mr. STANEEY M., 80, Cliesilton Road, Fulham, S. W. (Sept. 1898). Trevor - BaTTye, Mr. Aubyn, 2, Whitehall Gardens, Westminster. (July, 1898). Turner, Mr. Thomas, J.P., Cullompton, Devon. (Dec., 1895). VERRAEE, Mr. Ceaude H., Johannesburg, Streatham Common, S. W. (May, 1S97). Ward, The H011. Mrs. Somerset, Isle o’ Valla House, Downpatrick, Ireland. (August, 1S97). Wadham, Mr. Percy, 30, Holyrood Street, Newport, Isle of Wight. (April, 1898). Waeker, Miss H. K. O., Chesham, Bury, Rancashire. (Feb., 1895). Waeker, Mrs. Arthur, 48, Cranley Gardens, South Kensington, S.W. (April, 1898). Webb, Mr. Arthur W., Primrose Club, Park Place, St. James’s, Rondou, W. (March, 1896). WEEES, Mr. H., Colon, Chapel Road, Worthing. (Nov., 1S96). IX. WEST, Miss E. E., The Homestead, Hawthorne Road, Bickley Park, Kent. (April, 1898). * Whytehead, Mr. GodFrEE Y., 6, Bootham Terrace, York. (April, 1897). Whytehead, Mr. T. B., Acombe House, York. (April, 1897). Wiener. Mr. Aug. F., 2, Upper Bedford Place, Russell Square, W.C. (July, 1S96). Wiede, Miss, Little Gaddesden, Berkhampstead. (Dec., 1896). Wiekinson, Miss Beatrice, End Cliffe, Manor Road, Edgbastou, Birmingham. (Dec., 1894). WiEElAMS, Mr. Howard, 4, Highbury Grove. London, N. (April, 1895). Wieeiams, Mrs. Leseie, 8, George Street, Bathwick, Bath. (June, 1895). Wieeiams, Dr. J. D., 93, Newport Road, Cardiff. (Feb., 1897). Wieeiamson, Mrs. D., Merrow Dene, Epsom Road, Guildford. (August, 1898). WinchieSEa and Nottingham, The Dowager Countess of, 6, Bedford Square, London, W.C. (May, 1895). Wordsworth, Miss A. M., 149, King Richard’s Road, Leicester. (April, 1895). Wright, Mrs. G. J., 3, Rose Villas, Pictou Road, Ramsgate. (Feb., 1S98). DECEASED MEMBERS. 1894. Lady Macdonaed. (Orig. Mem.) 1895. Mr. H. Hoeeoway. (July, 1895). 1896. Mr. Robert Dashwood. (Orig. Mem.) * Mr. H. C. Greame. (June, 1S95). The Horn MariouiTA MlEEES. (Dec., 1894). 1897. Mr. Henry Erskine Aelon, M.A. (Feb., 1896). Mr. Wieeiam Thompson. (May, 1897). 1898. Mr. E. G. Haeeam. (June, 1S95). Mr. D. MeinerTzhagen. (Dec., 1896). X. RULES OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY. 1. — The name of the Society shall be “ The Avicueturae Society,’7 and its object shall be the study of Foreign and British Birds. Poultry, Pigeons and Canaries shall lie outside the scope of the Society. 2. — The officers of the Society shall be elected annually by the mem¬ bers in manner hereinafter provided, and shall consist of a President, one or more Vice-Presidents, a Treasurer, a .Secretary, an Auditor, a Scrutineer, and a Council of twelve members. The Secretary and Treasurer shall be ex officio members of the Council. 3. — Each member shall pay an annual subscription of 7/6, to be due and payable in advance on the 1st of November in each year. New members shall pay an entrance fee of 2/6. Any member whose subscription or entrance fee shall be four months overdue shall cease to be a member of the Society, and notice of his having ceased to be a member, and of the cause, shall be inserted in the Magazine. 4. — New members shall be proposed in writing ; and the name and address of every person thus proposed, with the name of the member proposing him, shall be published in the next issue of the Magazine. Unless the candidate shall, within two weeks after the publication of his name in the Magazine, be objected to b}r at least two members, he shall be deemed to be duly elected. If five members shall lodge with the Secretary objections to any candidate he shall not be elected, but the signatures to the signed objections must be verified hy the Scrutineer. If two or more members (but less than five) shall object to any candidate, the Secretary shall announce in the next number of the Magazine that such objections have been lodged (but shall not disclose the names of the objectors), and shall request the members to vote upon the question of the election of such candidate. Members shall record their votes in sealed letters addressed to the Scrutineer, and a candidate shall not be elected unless two-tliirds of the votes recorded be in his favour; nor shall a candidate be elected if five or more votes be recorded against his election. 5. — The Magazine of the Society shall be issued on the first day of every month, and forwarded, post free, to each member. The Secretary shall have an absolute discretion as to what matter shall be published in the Magazine (subject to the control of the Council). The Secretary shall refer all matters of doubt or difficulty to the Council. The decision of the majority of the Council shall be final and conclusive in all matters. 6. — The election of officers shall take place every j-ear between the 1st and 14th of October. All candidates must be proposed by one member and seconded by another member (in writing) before they shall be eligible for election ; but this shall not apply to officers willing to stand for re-election to the same office. All such proposals which have been duly seconded must be sent to the Secretary before the 14th of September. The Secretary shall prepare a voting paper containing a list of the candidates, showing the offices for which they are respectively seeking election or re-election, and shall send a copy of such voting paper to each member of the Society with the OCtober number of the Magazine. Each member shall make a cross (X) opposite the names of those for whom he desires to vote, XI. and shall sign the voting paper at the foot, and send it to the Scrutineer in a sealed envelope, before the 14th of October. The Scrutineer shall prepare a written return of the officers elected, showing the number of the votes recorded for each candidate, and send it to the Secretary before the 21st of October, for publication in the November number of the Magazine. In the event of an equality of votes, the President shall have a casting vote. 7. — It shall be lawful for the Council to delegate any of their powers to a Committe of not less than three. 8. — The Council (but not a Committee of the Council) shall have power to alter and add to the Rules, from time to time, in any manner they ma)' think fit. 9. — The Council shall have power to expel any member from the Society at any time, without assigning any reason. 10. — All members intending to resign their membership at the end of the current year of the Society shall give notice of their intention to the Secretary before the 14th October, and all members who do not so give notice shall continue to be members for the year following, and shall be liable for their subscriptions accordingly. 11. — Neither the office of Scrutineer nor the office of Auditor shall be held for two consecutive years by the same person. 12. — The Scrutineer shall not reveal to any person how any member shall have voted. 13. — If any office shall become vacant at any time, other than at the end of the Society’s year, the Council shall have power to nominate any member of the Society to fill the vacancy until the expiration of the then current year. THE SOCIETY'S MEDAL. The Medal is awarded to every member who succeeds in breeding any species of bird which has not previously been known to breed in captivity in this country. Any member wishing to obtain the Medal must send a detailed account to the Secretary within eight weeks from the date of hatching of the young, and furnish such evidence of the facts as the Executive Committee may require. The Medal will be awarded only in cases where the j-oung^shall live to be old. enough to feed themselves, and to be independent of their parents. The decision of the Committee shall be final. The Medal is struck in bronze, and measures 2J inches in diameter. It bears on the obverse a representation of two birds with a nest containing eggs, and the words “The Avicultural Society — Founded 1S94.’’ On the reverse is the following inscription : “Awarded to (name of donee) for rearing of young of (name of species) a species not previously bred in captivity in the United Kingdom.” Members to whom Medals have been Awarded. Mr. R. A. Todd, for breeding Poephila acuticauda in 1S97. Mr. George E. Bouskiee, for breeding Cyanorhamphits auric eps in 1S97. THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY. balance sheet for the year 1S97-S. S3 CO O CD CO Oc ti M m 10 cO o CO M CD O O 10 'd- O to O r-~ o o S3 to 2 — <0 £ E to P-< cd a3 a m to W Oi • O) o » o § C 05 * W 2 .0 to ^ is* PP 3 v~» in a -*-> r2 to t/i - u ^ C/3 - Cm 03 «> O ^ 1) (B ii 6 rt § < s - £ Ph tt CO CO w p< a H co W £ P4 W CO JOHN SERGEANT, Auditor. THE Bvtcultural ®aga3met BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY. VOL. V. — NO. 49. All rights reserved. NOVEMBER, 1898. BREEDING OF THE CHINESE PAINTED QUAIL. Excalfactoria chinensis. By E. G. B. Meade-Waldo. The interesting letter of Mr. Seth-Smitli, describing the nesting of his Chinese Onails, induces me to record the successful rearing of a bevy of these charming little birds in one of my aviaries this summer. The cock bird is a very old one, and has wintered out for several years (including the bitter winter of 1895), the East Riding of Yorkshire. The hen was kindly presented to me this spring, by Mr. Reginald Phillipps. When placed together, the little birds paired at once : the cock holding any little tit-bit in his beak, with his head held on one side, uttering a low crooning sound until the hen ran up and took it from him. A nest was scratched in the turf, and the first egg laid on June 12th ; twenty-one eggs were laid by July 3rd, on which day the hen commenced to sit. As the number of eggs seemed so disproportionate to the size of the bird, I removed ten, leaving eleven in the nest. The hen made up the nest by drawing in grass stems, and the like, but no feathers at all were added, as is the case with all the true Partridges, Pheasants, etc. The hen sat exceedingly well, the cock occasionally sitting by her side but never on the eggs. On July 23rd the hen came off with seven young ones, leaving one dead in the nest. These little birds were most marvellously active and independent, being able to run quite as fast as the parents on the day of hatching. They were, of course, very small indeed, but still they looked far too large for the eggs they had just come out of. They were dark chocolate in colour, with two broad dull yellow lines down the back, and three yellow stripes on the head. They fed principally on ants’ eggs — part of an ants’ nest being supplied in a tray twice a-day ; they also ate the ants themselves. From the first, however, they would eat mawseed, also the seeds of various weeds. Their growth was most wonderfully rapid, as will be seen by the following dates : Hatched on July 23rd ; August 5th, full fledged, able to fly well ; August 13th, the two 3^oung cocks easily distinguishable from the hens ; August 20th. full grown and almost in full plumage ; August 27th, young cocks in full plumage, indis¬ tinguishable from the parent, and crowing and calling the hens to feed. The precocit}^ of these little birds was most remarkable, especially in gallinaceous birds, where the assumption of full plumage (especial^ where the males differ greatly in plumage from the females) is usually a very lengthy process, spread at least over some months ; in this bird at five weeks old they were apparently adult. A prettier sight than this little family are now can hardly be imagined. To escape the burning sun of the last few weeks they have made little runs all through the grass of their lawn, like those made b3^ colonies of field voles. They have little seats under tufts of grass, and in looking at the grass nothing whatever is visible. Suddenly a little head pokes up through the grass and crows ; then another and another peer out in different places, and answer ; then they all settle down again, having assured one another that the3? are all there. Occasionally two sit in the same little form, but usually only one. I forgot to describe the eggs, which were yellowish stone colour, covered with small spots and dots of very dark brown. The eggs were large for the size of the bird. BREEDING VIRGINIAN CARDINALS. I. By the Rev. C. D. Farrar. Virginian Cardinals are probably familiar to almost all the readers of the Avicultural Magazine. In almost every bird shop, at a certain season of the 3^ear, you may see one or two unhappy cocks of this species, looking extremely sick and sorry. I11 bu3dng Virginian Cardinals let me give a word of caution : Buy them as soon after they arrive as possible, as a very short stay in a dealer’s cage will be fatal, for there the seeds of consumption will be laid which will sooner or later end the career of your purchase. When once acclimatised, Virginians are hardy enough, and will stand all weathers with perfect impunity, except fog ; but I have always found newly-come-over specimens exceedingly delicate. Indeed, I should be ashamed to say how many I have lost in acclimatising my present pair. But then, it doesn’t do to speak of losses ! I see that people often complain that they cannot keep their Cardinals in colour. I fancy that the reason is ‘wrong feeding.’ Hempseed is usually recommended, and if used freely I believe it will turn any bird nearly black. I know it will Bull¬ finches — a ‘black’ Bullfinch is simply a bird that has been fed on hemp. My Cardinals never have hemp ; they have canary, millet and live food ad libitum : and the cock is the most glorious colour you ever sawT ; a perfect blaze of scarlet. When newly imported, Virginians are usually badly knocked about, and deficient in wings and tail. I always pull out all the broken stumps, and cage the birds until the new feathers are come. This takes about six weeks. My birds are out of doors all the year round in a big garden aviary, among all sorts and conditions of birds ; and though there are nests and young all round them, the Cardinals maintain the path of virtue ; in fact they are the most inoffensive "birds I know of. Last 3^ear I came pretty near to success ; but just as the nest was finished, the hen got a tumour on her breast and I had to kill her. I soon got a new hen, but the season had gone by. This year the Cardinals began pretty early with nesting operations. The cock came into song about March, and soon after the hen began to carry about sticks and straws, but seemed unable to find a place to her mind, and went and laid three eggs on the bare ground. These are very small for the size of the bird, and exactty like the egg of the common House Sparrow. I was rather sickened over this, and thought I was to have no luck ; the more so as having the choice of two nests in the garden to put them in — a Chaffinch’s and a Robin’s — I selected the Robin’s, as I thought it most hidden, and of course I chose the wrong one ; for the next day some young calves in the field got nosing about, and put their heads into the nest (if was in a hole in a stump) and smashed all the eggs. That was finish No. i. About ten days later, the hen laid two more eggs and again on the bare ground, and as I could not find a nest to put them in I gave them to one of my children. Finish No. 2. 4 About a fortnight after this I happened to go into the aviary and, quite by chance, found the hen Virginian had built a nest in a bush, neatly lined with dry roots, and had two eggs. I looked next day and still only two eggs (much to my joy, as I knew two would take me plenty of rearing) and the hen sitting steadily. A curious thing happened now, for whereas until then the hen had been most ‘ scary,’ she would now let me go quite close to her without coming off. The cock now sang magnificently, especially in the evening ; but he took no part at all in incubation (although we are told that the cock always sits on the nest when the hen leaves it). Before the sitting commenced he was most attentive in feeding the hen ; and all through the time of incubation he fed his wife assiduously. They feed from the crop. All went well, and on the 13th day, on looking into the nest as I passed — July Sth — I found that both eggs had hatched. The young are queer looking little beggars covered over with very dark fluff, like young Bullfinches. I watched the process of feeding with great interest. The modus operandi was as follows: The cock arrived at the nest-side at stated intervals and fed the hen from the crop ; she then gently raised herself in the nest and fed the young. For a week I think she hardly ever left the nest. All feeding was done by the cock. I gave them peas, strawberries, cherries, maggots, and mealworms, in addition to seed. At the end of a week the young had grown famously, and were a sort of coffee colour. On the eighth day the eyes opened ; on the tenth they were well feathered ; colour, a sort of dark brown ; and to-day, July iSth, to my intense surprise, they have left the nest — I can’t say flown , rather they have hopped out. I found them quite happy, on the floor in the midst of an admiring throng of Pekin Robins and their own proud and happy parents. They are queer little mortals with small crests, no tails, and enormous legs and feet. The funny thing is, the Pekin Robins feed them as well as their own parents. The most wonderful part of the whole proceeding, to my mind, is this, that these birds have been reared in an aviary in which I have, besides the parents, two pairs of Pekin Robins and a pair of Shamas. It only shows what can be done. One other thing I have noticed, my Virginians hardly ever erect their crests ; whereas in a cage they are alwaj^s on end. I ought also to say that for five days I was ill in bed, after the hatching, and the birds were fed by Mrs. Farrar ; so that she must share the credit of our success. 5 I have been taken to task over my last article on Pekin Robins, because I ventured to run counter to the ‘ authorities.’ Nevertheless, I must do so again here. Mr. Gedney says that the four eggs were laid at intervals during eight days. All I can say is, mine laid every day like a well regulated bird. The cock, again, is stated to have settled down upon the eggs in the hen's absence. Mine was never so incautious. The young were hatched quite naked. Mine were covered over with dark fluff. The young, says Mr. Gedney, fledge rapidly, and leave the nest at the end of five weeks. I can only say with Dominie Sampson, Prodigious!!! Mine must have been very previous ; as they left at the end of ten days ! Judging from “ internal evidence,” I should doubt Mr. Gedney’s account of the nesting of the Virginian Cardinal. II. By the Rev. H. D. Astley. Even to those uninterested in the ways and habits of birds, the following experiment must prove attractive. Experi¬ ment is hardly the word, for it was by an accident that a pair of Virginian Cardinals ( Cardinalis cardinalis') made their escape from a large pheasautry, where they had been for two years, and had become inured to the many atmospheric changes of our climate ; not that they are ever delicate birds, for they make little of a November fog or a January snowstorm. However, they escaped on the 15th of May (1885), and as they kept about I did not take much trouble to get them in again, but put out their tin of canary seed so that they might not starve, and also as an extra inducement for them not to wander far from home. The pheasautry in which they had been confined is situated amongst bushes, and close by a rookery, which is all paled in, and adjoins the front garden lawns and a fairly large shrubbery, the home of many a bird ; rich in the growth of syringas, lilacs, box trees, and many other shrubs, amongst which spring up old elms, limes and firs. To this retreat, the Virginian Cardinals soon found their way, and the following morning after their escape, on going through the shrubbery^, I saw the cock bird perched on the tip-top of a hawthorn. There he was, singing as loud and as fast as the notes would come, his beautiful scarlet breast looking more brilliant than usual in the 6 full morning sun of a May day, whilst the intense green of tile hawthorn showed up the bird in strong relief. I felt as I saw him, that it was a sight that few, if any, in England were enjoying at that moment, or indeed at any other time, for I have never before heard of these American cousins being allowed their full liberty. Two days after this, in a very bare yew shrub, for it was nothing more, I observed a nest commenced. Although I never imagined that the Cardinals had already set to work, yet the nest struck me as being built of an unusual material, and its general appearance convinced me that no British bird with which I was familiar was constructing it. The nest was a very frail one, with no substantial foundation ; merely bits of dead grass and some old pieces of rush lightly interwoven, the whole structure being decidedly small for the size of the bird ; in fact, a Greenfinch would seem a more suitable occupant for it than its real owner. The shrub stands at a corner where four paths meet, and is therefore the most exposed position a bird could choose for such an object. The same day that I discovered the commence¬ ment of this nest, the gardener told me that he had actually seen the hen Virginian on it, whilst the cock bird perched himself on the top of the shrub. Exactly a week after they had escaped, the first egg was laid ; it was rather larger than a Sparrow’s in size, and dirty white in colour, with large blotches of reddish-brown, thicker at the round end than at the other. The hen laid five eggs in as many consecutive days. To protect such an exposed position, I tied some branches of yew all over the bush, thereby making it difficult for passers-by to see the bird on her nest. Four young birds were successfully hatched, the fifth egg being unfertile. The cock bird almost entirely ceased singing after the young were hatched, and his state of alarm was great if anyone passed near the nest. The eggs took exactly a fortnight to hatch. This brood of young Virginians soon came to grief ; a bird or a beast of some kind (it is not known what, but Jays were the suspected culprits) made off with a couple. The two remaining birds I tried to rear by hand, but they seemed unable to digest the food and, to my grief, died. The old couple at once began hunting for another nesting place and fixed upon one quite close to the former site, but this time in a low box bush. The nest was quickly finished and four eggs deposited in it, strict injunctions being given to the gardeners not to disturb it in any way ; and in order to try and guard against robbery from mice or squirrels, I tarred the stem of the bush as 7 far as I could and also placed some more branches of box upon the thinner parts at the top, so as to hide the eggs from prying eyes of unfriendly feathered fowl. But no ! after the hen bird had sat out more than half her time, the eggs disappeared, and — disappointment No. 2. The Virginian Cardinals themselves seemed to lose less heart than I did, for they actually commenced another nest the day after they had lost their second hope of a brood, and, experientia docens, they built their third nest in a holly tree of a somewhat weeping growth, placing it in the under side of an overhanging branch about 9ft. from the ground. Four eggs were again laid and hatched on the 5th of August of the same year (1885) in which the parents had escaped : but when the young birds, which grew apace, were about a week old once more two disappeared, evidently taken by a Jay or a Squirrel, for the nest was rather demolished, so in despair the other two were carried into the shelter of the house. . One was considerably larger than the other, and it was this one that succumbed in a day or two, either to injuries or indigestion ; the other bird, an ugly uncouth little creature, was fed upon sopped bread and plenty of fruit — strawberries, grapes, etc. He throve, and he turned out luckily to be a male bird. I had him for several years in his splendid scarlet plumage, insolently tame, and a delightful pet. He attained his red coat in the late autumn to a great degree, though, perhaps owing to the vicissitudes of his early life, not nearly so bright in colour as he became in his second year. To any stranger approaching his cage with friendliness, he would put up his crest and sing himself hoarse, and if allowed to come out, he would fly to one’s shoulder and wdth grotesque movements shout into one’s ear. I must add that the parent birds, after having been decoyed back again into the pheasantry, were once more released in the following spring, much to their delight. They built again, but the hen bird, after laying two eggs, was found dead. This year (1898) I turned out a pair of Virginians in April, which are still at large, and are to be seen, most days, flitting about among the trees, or across the lawns. They built a nest in June, but the heavy rains in the early part of the month seemed to damp their ardour, and they forsook just before the eggs, three in number, were due to hatch. Unlike the former pair, they have not nested again. 8 THE CRYSTAL PALACE SHOW OF OCTOBER, 1898. INTRODUCTORY. The Show of British and Foreign Birds, and Hybrids, held at the Crystal Palace, on the 4th, 5th, and 6th of October, by the National British Bird and Mule Club and the Foreign Bird Exhibitors’ League, was a notable event in the history of Bird Shows, because it marks the emancipation of the exhibiting aviculturists from the bondage of the Canary “ fancy ” to which they had hitherto been subject. The Show was an unqualified success, and reflects great credit upon Mr. FroSTick, the energetic Hon. Secretary, and upon the Show Committee. (I think I may say this without appearing to blow my own trumpet, for, although a member of the Committee, I must confess that I only attended one meeting). A remarkable feature was the almost entire absence of “ wrongly classed ” entries. I could only find one such entry in the Foreign classes — an unfortunate pair of Bengalese which had somehow got into Class 65. This proves what can be done to prevent (by careful drafting of the Schedule, and the kindly help of the Secretary) what is usually considered an unavoidable incident of Bird Shows. It is to be regretted that the classes for common Waxbills and Grassfinches were so badly filled. These classes are new, and exhibitors are a curiously conservative race. Probably many thought that these classes would be over-crowded, and refrained from making entries in them for that reason. I believe that if they be repeated next year, the result will be quite different. Considering the number of Bulbuls which appeared at the Palace in February, it is singular that the Bulbul class had to be cancelled at this Show. Horatio R. Fiixmer. BRITISH BIRDS. As regards British birds, it is rather doubtful whether the commencement of October is the most suitable time to hold a Show : many being scarcely through the moult by that time and, therefore, not in show form. This being so, one was almost surprised to find so large a number of specimens, mostly of grand quality, staged at Sydenham on the 4th, 5th, and 6th of the month,. 9 Neither the Bullfinches nor the Goldfinches were quite in show form : probably a month later they would have looked decidedly better. The Chaffinches, on the other hand, were a remarkably fine lot ; the first and second prize-winners being especially fine specimens. There was also a good collection of Linnets and the competition was very keen. The winner of the first prize was a grand bird, in splendid feather and very steady. Several others, however, ran it very close. The Twites and Redpolls also formed a large class, a grand specimen of the former species taking the first prize. A very large Redpoll, unusually light on the breast, although an undoubted specimen of A. rufescens, was a good second. Class 6 (Siskins) contained some very nice birds. The winner of the first prize was a very highly- coloured bird, and strongly suggested colour feeding. The second was equally good, but not so bright in colour. Class 7 (All other species of Resident Finches and Buntings). This class contained chiefly Hawfinches and Yellow Buntings. The first prize-winner — a Hawfinch — was a very fine specimen, in beautiful plumage. A very bright Yellow- hammer was second. Miss Hopwood’s Reed-bunting was a very fair specimen, and there was also a Cirl Bunting — a species far more common in many parts than is usually supposed. The Class for Migratory Finches and Buntings consisted chiefly of Bramblings, The first prize winner was far the best, being unusually rich in colour for the time of the year. A nice Mealy Redpoll was second, the other prizes going to Bramble- finches. The Skylarks were not a large class, but the few there were, were of great merit. Mr. May’s bird, which was placed first, was one of the best Larks I have ever seen. The Robins were good : the first and second prize winners being beauties, but not so steady as they might have been. Some grand Blackbirds were shown : the winner of the first prize being, to my mind, quite perfedt. Song-thrushes were also an especially fine class, and there was little to choose between the winners of the first three prizes. The Starlings did not form a large class, but were of very good quality; Mr. Fulljames’ “Jacob” — the first-prizewinner — is an old friend and an exceedingly nice bird. Class 14 (Magpies, Jackdaws, Jays and Choughs). — Mr. Fulljames’ Chough was a perfect specimen, and well deserved the first place of honour. The second prize went to a nice Magpie, IO which, however, appeared to have one hind toe slightly deformed. A Jackdaw was third, and a Jay fourth ; both were exceedingly good birds. Class 15 contained some very interesting “ rare feathered specimens of British birds.” Mr. Fulljames’ Cinnamon Starling was easily first : it was a charming bird. The second prize went to a small and insignificant-looking Pied Wheatear, of small interest compared with the White Whitethroat shown by Mr. Fishburn, which I think should have been placed second: it was not an albino, having dark eyes, and showing one or two dark feathers on the back. A Cinnamon Blackbird, sent by Mr. Fulljames, was placed third ; and a Cinnamon Chaffinch, belonging to the same gentleman, obtained the fourth prize. Other interesting exhibits in this class were a White Finnet, a Cinnamon Yellowhammer and a Yellow Greenfinch, all shown by Mr. G. C. Swailes. Class 16 (All other species of Resident Insectivorous Birds not larger than a. Woodlark). This was a very interesting class, and contained some birds very rarely seen in captivity. A Tree-creeper obtained the first prize, and, considering the difficulty there must be in keeping this bird in captivity, it deserved all it got. A Wren, shown by Mr. Maxwell, obtained the second prize : it looked happy and contented enough, but it would have stood little chance against a very nice pair of the same species (No. 215) which were entered in this class, but for some reason did not turn up until the judging was finished. A lovely Grey Wagtail (catalogued as a Pied) was deservedly third, and a nice Pied obtained the fourth prize. There were two Stonechats in this class : one was a nice bird, but the other was too ill to swallow a mealworm 011 the first day. Mr. Maxwell exhibited a beautiful Fong-tailed Titmouse {Acredula rosea ) which only received a V.H.C. card, although it surely deserved something more. Mr. Fulljames’ exhibit (No. 230) was a typical specimen of the Continental foim of the Fong¬ tailed Tit, known to ornithologists as Acredula caudala, and differing from the British form by the absence of any dark markings on the head. A nice Crested Titmouse, a rare British bird nowadays, and a female Bearded Tit or Reedling were about the only other birds of especial interest in the class. Class 17 was devoted to the larger Insectivorous Residents. No less than seven Greater Spotted Woodpeckers ( Dendrocopus major) were here shown, but one pair did not arrive in time for competition. With regard to this species, it should be remem- II bered that the young birds have the entire crown crimson ; in the adult male there is a patch of crimson at the back of the head, the crown being black. In the adult female there is no trace of red on the back of the head or neck. The winner of the first prize, and its next door neighbour, were illustrations of how a Woodpecker should, and how it should not, be exhibited. Mr. Barnes’ beautiful female, which well deserved her first prize, was shown in a very suitable cage in which an artificial log of cork-bark had been fixed. With this the bird was perfectly happy and contented ; and it was most entertaining to watch it take a nut from the food-tin and insert it carefully in a hole in the log, where, with rapid and powerful blows from its bill, the shell was soon smashed and the kernel was quickly devoured. The other, No. 236, which one could not help pitying and comparing its surroundings with those of its neighbour, was not, in itself, a bad specimen ; but it was a great pity that its owner was not better acquainted with the nature of a Woodpecker than to send it to a Show in a cage made for a Norwich Canary. The poor creature kept trying in vain to climb the sides of its prison, where it could obtain no foothold, and, when it hopped on to its perch, it fell backwards upon its tail, until, finally, it gave up all attempts at perching, and lay down on the bottom of its cage. A lovely Missel Thrush, very tame and absolutely perfect, was deservedly second, and another of the same species, and almost equally good, took the third prize ; the fourth going to another Great Spotted Woodpecker. Class 18 contained a fine collection of Nightingales, and it was not easy to say which was the best bird : personally, I preferred the winner of the second prize to the one awarded first. A nice Blackcap was fourth. Some very interesting birds were exhibited in the class for smaller Migrants. It was most unfortunate that those entered by Mr. George Jeffre}^ did not arrive until just before the Show was opened to the public, and, consequently, much too late for competition. The winner of the first prize was by far the best Yellow Wagtail that I remember to have seen ; it was sent by Mr. Wm. Cullen, and claimed at the Catalogue-price of £$ 5s. 6d. A Whin ch at. was awarded an extra first prize ; Miss Hopwood’s Wheatear was a good second. There were some very beautiful Redstarts : one exceptionally fine specimen, shown by Mr. Maxwell, obtained an extra second prize; a Spotted Flycatcher, 12 shown by the same gentleman, obtained third, and extra thirds were awarded to a Yellow Wagtail and a Redstart. Several Swallows were shown in this class, and, although some of these were much better birds than many that have at former Shows taken first and second prizes, none of those here exhibited obtained very high honours. Swallows always look miserable and sadly out of place in cages, and it is satisfactory to find that the Judge did not encourage the capture of a bird so perfectly adapted to a life in the air and so hopelessly miserable in captivity. Several Whitethroats, Yellow Wagtails, a Red- backed Shrike, and a nice Garden Warbler were also shown in this class, which contained nearly sixty entries, some of which, however, were absent. Class 20 (All other species of Migratory Insectivorous Birds), Five very good Ring Ouzels were shown in this class, the first, second and third prizes going to these birds; the fourth was won by a nice Redwing. A miserable young Cuckoo was shown here also, and illustrated clearly the folly, not to say cruelty, of caging this species. The last class that I have to mention was, to me, the most interesting, as it contained several species of European birds which are not usually recognised as our fellow-countrymen. A very fine specimen of Acredula caudata, before mentioned as the Continental form of our Eong-tailed Titmouse (. A . rosea ) was, rightly, I think, shown in this class by Mr. Maxwell ; it did not receive a card, and I find on referring to the Catalogue, that it is therein marked “ Wrong Class.” Why this should be is not clear. I have not the N. B. B. and M. C. list of British birds by me, but I should be much surprised to hear that the White-headed form of the Long-tailed Tit is therein included. Some orni¬ thologists do not recognise it as a good species, but it is, at any rate, a very well-defined sub-species, and is certainly not British although undoubtedly European. Mr. Fulljames took all the prizes in this class, his rare Warbler, which I took to be Hypolais polyglotta (but on this point I am not certain) taking first. A Blue-throat, a most beautiful specimen, which appeared to belong to the Southern or White -spotted race ( Cyanecula wolfi ), was second. A nice specimen of the Greater Nightingale or Sprosser ( Daitlias philo- viela ) — difficult to distinguish by the light in the tent from our D. luscinia — third ; and a magnificent Rock Thrush fourth. The Rock Thrushes are a connecting link between the true Thrushes and the Chats, and the Chat-like habit of shaking the tail was 13 very noticeable in Mr. Fulljames’ bird. A very fine pair of Hobbies ( Falco subbuteo ) and a Calandra Tark ( Melanocorypha calandra ) were also shown in this class. D. Seth-Smith. PARROTS. I may, perhaps, be expected to give a few notes on the classes I judged at the Teague’s first Show, held at the Crystal Palace, on October 4th, 5th, and 6th. As far as the Parrots were concerned, it was not a very good show. It is useless to expect one, unless better prizes can be offered, and a knowledge of the show brought home to the many possessors of Parrots scattered throughout the country. It has probabty never dawned upon the minds of the greater part of them that there is such a thing as a Parrot Show : and, if it has, they would not risk their pets on a journey for prizes of 15/-, 10/-, 5/-, and 2/6. To say nothing of the risk and trouble of sending the birds, the prizes will not repay entry fees and carriage. The public is indebted for such interest as the shows have to the competition of two or three great exhibitors, like Mr. Fulljames, Mr. Maxwell, and Mr. H. B. Smith ; though, every now and then, an interesting exhibit, such as Mr. Cocksedge’s Red -mantled Parrakeets, is found in a single entry. M3^ first class was “ Tories and Torikeets,” which had 14 entries, of which two, if not three, were absent. In this class I gave the 1st prize to a Forsten’s Torikeet, shown by Mr. Arthur in admirable trim (a) ; 2nd and 3rd went to Scaly-breasted Tori¬ keets — the two exhibits were equally smooth and glossy, but I gave 2nd to the pair as it is more difficult to show a good pair than one. Fourth went to a Blue Mountain, belonging to Mr. Silk. Reserve I gave to a bird entered as a Purple-breasted Tory (b) — this was the most uncommon bird in the class. Mr. Cusliny showed a Ceram Tory in very good plumage. Mr. Maxwell’s Ornamented lacked brilliancy of colour, and so did the Blue Mountains. Mr. Smith showed two Rubras, but they were too rough in plumage to obtain notice. It is a pity to show Parrots in what are called exhibition cages : it is absolutely impossible to judge a bird unless you can see all round it, and any Judge may be pardoned for passing a Parrot in such a cage. A Musky Torikeet, shown by Mr. Frostick, was too sleepy to win a card. (a) Mr. Arthur tells me that this bird has acquired a taste for canary-seed, and now will not touch anything else. — F. G. D. (6) Eos riciniuta — I had a specimen over three years ago. — R. P. 14 My next class was the Greys. Here I had but five birds before me — 506 was absent. The 1st prize was won by Mrs. Peacock, with a fine bird in irreproachable condition and bloom. I know something of Grey Parrots, and I have never seen one better shown, perhaps never so well. Had Mrs. Peacock been a member of the Teague, she would have taken the prize for the best-conditioned Parrot in the Show. It was entered as a cock : it has the build of a hen. Amazons — my next class — naturally provide more variety. There were seven birds before me, one was absent. First went to 513 — a Festive belonging to Mr. Maxwell, which was very well shown : 2nd to an inornata of Mr. H. B. Smith ; 3rd to one entered as “ Spectacled.” “Spectacled,” Russ gives as a term for the White - browed. This bird almost looked to me like a young xantholora ; 4th to a well-shown ochrocephala. The remaining birds were Blue-fronted, and were not in specially good plumage. Class 43, for Eclectics Parrots, was poor ; there was only one well shown. The only remarks I have to make are that all four birds were cocks, and the second prize belonged to a smaller species. Perhaps my most interesting class was 44 : here I had nine entries and no absentees. I was rather doubtful between the Meyer and the Bronze-wing for first place. But the Bronze¬ wing did not show himself well, owing to his cage, and so I gave it to the Meyer. The Bronze-wing, who a little later pulled himself together, was good enough for 1st. The Hawk-head to which I gave 3rd, was in brilliant health, but not quite through his moult; had he been, I will not say he might not have been first. A lineolatus, for the same reason — that he was not through his moult — got only H. C. There were three, of what I put down as menstruus. Two of these may have been in immature plumage, or they may have been of some species of Pionus unknown to me ; they were in poor plumage (c). I now come to Macaws — here there were five. First went to Mr. Fulljames’ Hyacinthine, beautifully shown ; 2nd to a Crimson and Green of Mr. Smith’s, too much hidden by its cage ; 3rd was a Blue and Yellow, and 4th an Illiger’s. There was also Mr. Fulljames’ Spix, the rarest bird in my classes — but in such indifferent plumage I could not even give it a card. Class 46, for Lemon- crested Cockatoos, was cancelled, and with Class 47, for Salmon-crests, Leadbeaters, etc., my labours (t) Mr. Fulljames showed a Pionus senilis, but when I was judging" it looked rather rough. — F. G. I). 15 came to an end. Here, there were several Leadbeaters beauti¬ fully shown, as, indeed, was 53S, a Salmon-crest. I gave 1st to a pair of Leadbeaters, because it is, as I say, more creditable to show a pair than one. But it is really no easy task to show a Salmon-crest with the spotless purity of Mr. Jacob’s bird. Third went to Mr. Maxwell’s well-shown lieu Ganga. It is possible, however, to get Gangas into still better condition, and that kept her lower than she would have otherwise been. Mr. Fulljames showed a pair, but they were not in very good bloom. Mr. Housden’s two Leadbeaters were two cocks. In pen 539 there were a pair of Leadbeaters which I very highly commended, which were peculiar for the hen being richest in colour. The Specials, that had to be judged by Mr. Camps and myself, were two : one for the rarest bird, and one for the best- conditioned one, belonging to members of the League. Mrs. Peacock’s Grey would have won the latter, but she is not a member of the League ; after that, it was a toss-up between Mr. Fulljames’ pair of Leadbeaters and his Crimson-wing — the prize fell to the pair. My rarest bird was Mr. Fulljames’ Spix Macaw; but his Princess of Wales Parrakeet, Mr. Maxwell’s Golden¬ shouldered, and Mr. Cocksedge’s Red-mantled Parrakeets were all as rare, and in infinitely better condition. So I felt my classes must resign that prize. Where were the “ Unicolors ” Mr. Fulljames showed me at Brooklyn ? (d) But a prize for the rarest bird is rather difficult to award. As far as I know Spix’s Macaw, the Princess of Wales Parrakeet, the Red - mantled Parrakeet, and the Golden-shouldered are all one as rare as the other. Again, what is meant by the rarest? The one of which there are fewest specimens in the world ? Who can tell that ? Or the one that comes least often into the bird-market ? But one year that is one, another another. Three }^ears ago I would have given it to the Ganga Cockatoo ; now that is comparatively often seen. Perhaps Paradise Parrakeets, which at one time could be easily bought, would win that prize to-day. However, I must close, leaving my questions for others to answer. F. G. Dutton. FOREIGN FINCHES. The classification appeared to me extremely liberal, the arrangement of the classes was good, and a series of notes, giving detailed instructions as to entering birds in their proper classes, made it practically impossible for aiw exhibitor to enter his birds ( d ) Dead, I have since heard. F. G. D. i6 wrongly. Moreover, very special inducements were held out to those aviculturists who are unable to keep rare and costly birds, by providing a number of classes limited to the common and cheap species. Now we hear a great many complaints about the impossibility of the smaller aviculturists competing with the owners of big and costly collections, and about the iniquity of the latter in “ sweeping the board” at all the Shows : here was an opportunity for the grumblers — special classes for the common Waxbills, the common Grassfiuclies and the Mannikins, and prize money equal to that offered in the classes for rare birds. What was the result ? In each of these classes the number of entries was very small, and the birds by no means equal in con¬ dition to those exhibited in the classes for rare birds. It seems unlikely that the Committee will consider it worth their while to provide these classes at any future Show. In Class 49 (Weavers and Whydahs) the most striking exhibit was a large cage containing a flock of Paradise Whydahs, all male birds in full breeding plumage. Such a spectacle alone was well worth a journey to the Palace. The most uncommon bird in the class (and probably in the Show) was No. 566, named by the owner, Mr. Fulljames, a “Pong-tailed Combasou,” and which might be described as a Combasou with a tail of a Whydah, but the beak was black, not yellow like that of a Combasou. There were several excellent Paradise Whydahs, only one of which (No. 569) was accompanied by a female. A pair of birds, where the sexes differ, makes a far more interesting and valuable exhibit than a single bird. There were several Pintailed Whydahs, most of which were exceedingly timid and wild ; while all their brethren of the Paradise species were steady and placid. A rare Weaver, sent by Mr. Swaysland, was, I think, a specimen of the Yellowish Weaver. A Chera procne, sent by Mr. Housden, was in poor condition. Two of the rare Crimson- banded or Cut-throat Whydahs were exhibited, neither of which was in first-rate trim. There were some good Orange, Oryx, Crimson-crowned and Madagascar Weavers, and a very nice pair of Combasous. Class 50 was one of the disappointments : it was limited to the commoner Waxbills and had only eight entries, one of which was absent. No. 574 was a nice brightly-coloured pair of Zebra Waxbills, and 580 a good pair of Orange-cheeks. There was one entry of St. Helenas (which appeared to be both cocks), one Avadavat, and no Grey Waxbills. Class 51 was splendid. Three specimens of the Red- faced Finch (. Pytelia afro), a male and two females, were contributed 17 by Mr. I,. W. Hawkins, and each was exhibited separately. It seems almost a pity that a pair should not have been exhibited together: however, by separating them the owner gained three awards instead of two. A very lovel}* female Violet-eared Waxbill, in the most exquisite condition, was sent by Mr. Maxwell, and a fine pair of the same species, by Mr. Fulljames ; but the latter ■were, unfortunately, moulting. There were several very good Crimson Finches, one of which, sent by Mr. Maxwell, was decidedly brighter than the others. Two good Rufous-tails were contributed by Mr. Maxwell and Mr. H. B. Smith. There were several excellent pairs of Cordon-bleus, the best of which belonged to Mr. Fulljames. The Sydney Waxbills wTere poor. Mr. Smith’s Crimson-winged Waxbill was good : why is it that one hardly ever sees a hen of this species ? A Green Avadavat (593) seemed to have sustained some injury on its journey. Class 52. — Gouldians and Parrot Finches ; 13 entries, and all good. Mr. Maxwell’s Black-headed Gouldian (615) excelled in the brilliancy of his hues and the satiny polish of his plumage, and was, moreover, decorated with an exceptionally long pair of pin-feathers in his tail. The same exhibitor sent a grand cock Parrot Finch (614). Why is it that Parrot Finches, which are easy birds to keep in condition, almost always look rough at Shows? A Three-coloured Parrot Finch (612) was an interest¬ ing, but not a very prett}r, bird. Class 53. — Another class for common birds, and another disappointment, contained eight entries, including a good pair of Parson Finches, two good Diamond Sparrows, and some moderate Zebra and Ribbon Finches. Class 54. — Grassfinches and Cuba Finches. This was principally interesting on account of the very beautiful Long¬ tailed Grassfinches, more elegant in shape than the Parson Finches, which they closely resemble, and with more delicately- shaded tints of grey and brown. Mr. Hawkins’ pair (626) were absolutely perfedt in condition and plumage, and others were almost as good. The Masked Finches are hardly as pretty. Mr. Maxwell’s Bieheno’s Finches were also in exquisite plumage. Is it possible to distinguish the sexes of this species by inspection ? With all due respect to certain avicultural writers, I do not think it possible to distinguish them with certainty — of course, one can make a pretty good guess in some cases. Mr. Fulljames sent a good pair of Cuba Finches, and there were several Red¬ headed Finches. Class 55 (Java Sparrows) contained 13 entries. The i8 White birds were very good ; one always hopes that no faulty feathers have come out in washing them. The Greys, as a rule, were less perfect and wilder. Class 56 (Mannikins), a poor class. Mr. Fulljames sent a rare bird (569) which, unfortunately, looked very ill. Mr. Maxwell sent a fine male specimen of Munia pectoralis, to my mind, the only very attractive species of Mannikin, except the Bengalese ; the latter are always charming. Mr. Fulljames had a good pair of Pied Mannikins, and Mrs. Spencer a very nice pair of Brown and White Bengalese. Class 59 was the poorest class of Cardinals I have yet seen at the Palace. Miss Jackson’s Green bird, no longer in his first youth, was the best. A pair of Red-crested birds, belonging to Mr. Ball, were good in condition and colour, but very wild, and were in too small a cage. The Dominicans were very wild and in poor condition. Class 60 (Grosbeaks, Finches, and Buntings) had some very nice and interesting birds. Entries 675 and 677, both belonging to Mrs. Frostick, were birds of two species I had not previously met with, and both, judging from their appearance, were somewhat nearly related to the Serin Finches. No. 676, belonging to the same exhibitor, was a pair of Grey Singing Finches in particularly neat plumage ; for some reason or other, one hardly ever sees a good Grey Singing Finch at a Show. No. 667 was a bright but tailless specimen of Chrysomitris tristis , and 668 a good Black-headed Siskin : 666, a moderate pair of Pileated Finches. The remaining birds were a good Non¬ pareil, a Jacarini Finch, a pair of Saffron, and two pairs of Green Singing Finches. C. S. Simpson. DOVES AND SOFT-BIEEED BIRDS. Class 48. — Mr. J. B. Housden’s Green Nicobar Pigeons were placed first (with special) as they have been before ; his other pair being second. Beautiful birds in themselves, but clumsy when confined in a Parrot’s cage, and under such circum¬ stances decidedly handicapped. Mr. D. Seth-Smith’s Jungle Bush Quails (3rd) were pretty, but very timid. The Diamond and Zebra Doves, as well as the Necklaced Turtle Doves, were all pleasing to the eye. But this class was poorly represented. Class 61. — A very good class, and a difficult one to award individual prizes to. Mr. Fulljames carried off the first three 19 prizes and a special. Some may consider that the first and special prizes would have been better awarded to the rare Blue and Black Tanager, rather than to the Tricoloured. But they were all beautiful, and perhaps all worthy of the first honours, though unfortunately unable to win them. One or two of the Scarlet Tanagers were in good plumage, especially that which won 4th, being extremely well shown in a cage with a brilliant green background (Mrs. Frostick’s good taste). Mr. Phillips’ Superb Tanager was in glorious colour, and only deprived of greater honours than V.H.C. by the fadt of his meeting with rarer cousins in competition. Class 64. — Amongst Starlings, Mynahs, Troupials, etc., Mrs. H. C. im Thurn took 1st with a very tame and pretty Yellow and Black Troupial. Mr. H. J. Fulljames’ Andaman and Black-headed Starlings were in lovely condition and well shown. A commendation was given to a healthy pair of apparently juvenile Rose-coloured Pastors (Mr. J. B. Housden’s) (n to my hand and throw himself apparently into a great rage, not suffering me to touch anything in the room, and occasionally perching on my head with the hopes of depriving me of my brains ; at least it feels like that ! 1 If let out of his cage at breakfast time, he wall fly on to the table and trip rapidly amongst the dishes, piping all the time, and quite ready to seize your pat of butter ! A most charming bird. But this latter propensity in him may have altered your opinion l ON THE JAY AS A CAGE-BIRD. B3^ Percy W. Farmborough, F.Z.S. The Jay, so far as my experience has taught me, is a most intelligent and interesting cage-bird, provided the cage be sufficiently large. An acquaintance of mine, when I told him in the course of a general conversation that I had a Jay, said “ What, have you got one of those filthy birds ? I had one, but ‘ never no more.’ Why, do you know it is the dirtiest bird there is 1 it is perfectly impossible to keep it clean ; we had it from a relation in the country as a young bird ; we fed it on bread and milk, and kept it in a nice cage which the wife cleaned out twice a week, and yet, in spits of all our attention and care, it became such a ‘stinker’ we had to give it away. I’ll let you have the (b) This is much the same position as is assumed by the Blue Robin- ( Sialia sialis) after pairing.— A. G. B. 53 cage cheap if you like ! ” I thanked him for his offer, and said that I was sorry that I was not in want of it. He replied, “Well, I’ll give it to you, I want to get rid of it.” A few days later the cage came to hand — a beautiful arrangement of brass wire and inlaid wood, just about large enough for the Jay to turn round in ; there was no room at all for exercise, and really it was about the most unfit cage that could have been used. I was not surprised, after hearing that the bird was fed on bread and milk, that it was dirty, especially when the cage was cleaned out only twice a week ; but when I saw the cage I was simply astounded that a man had no more sense than to keep a bird the size of a Jay in it. The smallest cage used by the writer, for even such birds as Unnets, is 32 inches long by 3 4 inches high and 24 inches wide. A cage for a Jay should certainly be not less than the above size ; the door should be a large one, so that the interior can be cleaned out properly every day. A small door is an abomination, as it prevents the free movement of the arm inside the cage. Personally, I prefer the turn-rail to a sliding tray. My^ objection to a sliding tray is that, after any length of time, the splashing of water, caused by the bird when it bathes, causes the wood to warp and stick, preventing the easy with¬ drawal of the tray'-— the drawer of the cage, above mentioned, when I tried to take it out, remained stuck to the cage, the brass knob and veneered front coming away in my hand — whilst a turn-rail has simply to be pulled open, and a scraper introduced to effectually remove any excreta and refuse there may be. The Jay f Gar ruins gland arms J is a bird which is familiar to most dwellers in the country^, but town-folk know it as a rule by pictures or stuffed specimens in the Natural History Museum. In Dr. Butler’s work on “ British Birds,” it is stated that in Kent the nest of the Jay is rarely seen. In Shropshire, round Delburyr (or more correctly, Diddlebury) I had no difficulty in taking several nests, and although shot by keepers, the bird is a •common one in the district. In Hertfordshire, too, the Jay is fairly7- common, although, naturally, not to the extent it is in Shropshire ( c ). (c) I think I only twice, or at most three times, took the nest of this bird in Kent, but I have seen as many as five birds together on the outskirts of a Kentish wood. The •cage in which I keep my Jay measures 5 feet 3 inches long, 3 feet 4 inches high, 2 feet deep ; my draw-trays are of zinc and I use plenty of sand and shingle. I do not find a daily cleansing necessary, and there is no smell. — A. G, B. I have repeatedly seen from 10 to 20 Jays cross a ride in a wood in Kent. — E-G.B. M.-W. 54 The young are easily hand-reared. My plan was to feed them on barleymeal and ants’-eggs made into a crumbly paste with raw hens’-eggs (without the shells, of course) and supple¬ mented with pieces of raw meat. On this diet they throve rapidly and developed into fine large birds. The above food, with the addition of beetles and other large insects, formed the diet when adult, and I am certain that my Jays were in much better condition and plumage than that of the gentleman mentioned above. I allowed my birds occasionally to come out of the cage ; they got very tame and exceedingly impudent — nearly as “cheeky” as a Jackdaw. THE LIMITS OF LEGITIMATE AVICULTURE. By H. R. Fiixmer. No doubt all aviculturists are satisfied as to the morality of keeping birds in captivity — the fact of their being aviculturists. shews that they do not agree with the amiable enthusiasts who consider it cruel and wicked. But of the general public who are not aviculturists — the outsiders in fact — there is undoubtedly a considerable section who are opposed to the capture of wild birds for cage or aviary, and some, like Mr. W. H. Hudson, go so far as even to condemn the keeping of Canaries. We may rightly regard this as fanaticism, born of sentimentality and ignorance, but at the same time we should be wise if we do what we can to disarm criticism by dissociating ourselves from certain practices for which aviculture may be blamed, and which most of us regard as outside “ the limits of legitimate aviculture.” I should like it to be clearly understood that I am not seeking to lay down the law as to what is legitimate and what is illegitimate — the decision of every point as it arises must be left to the good sense of the avicultural community — but merely to indicate in a general way what I believe to be the tendency of opinion among modern aviculturists. I think the feeling is growing that we ought, as much as possible, to encourage the keeping of birds in aviaries, and discourage the use of cages. While if cages be used it is agreed that they should be fairly large ones, and the abominable little prisons still too often seen are generally condemned. 55 Some consider bird-shows cruel. With this I cannot agree. Although I am not myself an exhibitor, I believe that Shows have their uses, and on the whole do more good than harm. But it must be conceded that many things connected with Shows are capable of improvement from a humanitarian point of view. The suggestion has been made that the Show Committees should reserve power, under the rules, to disqualify any exhibit sent in a cage which they consider too small or otherwise cruelly unsuitable, and also to either remove the bird into a proper cage until the close of the Show, or return it immediately to the owner. I think that some such rule is really necessary. A larger and more important question (and the one which I had chiefly in my thoughts when I chose the title for this paper) is as to whether certain species and groups of birds are not, by their very nature, so unsuited for captivity as to make their confinement in itself an adt of cruelty. Personally I feel bound to answer the question in the affirmative, and I should be disposed to put a good many species “ outside the limits.” All the species of Swallows seem most ill-adapted for life in cage or aviary, and I think we ought to do all we can to discourage their capture. There are other species, such as the Wren, the Chiff- chaff, and the Willow- warbler, which endure captivity so badly (chiefly because of food difficulties) that their capture seems almost equally undesirable. If the secret of keeping these birds in health could be discovered, the objection would vanish — but so long as their confinement leads to the death of nine out of ten within a few weeks, and ninety-nine out of a hundred within a few months, it appears mere cruelty to cage them. Another practice which we all agree in condemning is the endeavouring to keep delicate insectivorous birds while un¬ willing or unable to bestow upon them the care and attention, and the somewhat expensive and troublesome food, which they require. The keeping of such birds as the Nightingale is perfectly legitimate, if they bt properly kept ; but such keeping involves a considerable expenditure of both time and money, and those who are not prepared to incur this should restrict themselves to seed-eaters. In writing these notes I have endeavoured to avoid undue dogmatism. I hope my readers will understand that my object is to suggest a line of thought, not to lay down a series of rules. 56 REVIEW. Notes on Cage- Birds (Second Series ) or Practical Hints on the Management of British and Foreign Cage-Birds , Hybrids and Canaries. By various Hands. Edited by W. T. Greene, M.A., M.D. (L. Upcott Gill. Price 6I~J. This is a reprint in book form of “ a selection from the various articles, letters, and notes relating to Cage-Birds, that have appeared in the Bazaar from 1882 (when the First Series was issued) to the present day.” Such a book as this must necessarily be of a rather scrappy and hap-hazard character, but it contains a good deal of information worthy of preservation in more permanent form than the columns of a newspaper, and we think aviculturists will find it interesting. The fact that every letter in the book is signed either by initials or by a nom de plume detracts somewhat from its value. The statements of an anonymous writer are not entitled to so much weight as those of one who gives his name. Still, the identity of H. D. A., F. G. D„ R. P., C. P. A., W. T. C., J. H. V., W. O., and others, is sufficiently transparent, and to readers of the Avicultural Magazine, at any rate, will be no mystery. The letters appear to have been somewhat severely edited, so much so, indeed, as to have lost nearly all individuality in the process. Such an experienced journalist as Dr. Greene may be trusted to make the most of the materials at his command, and it is therefore scarcely needful to say that the book is well arranged and eminently readable. Two instances are here recorded of Spice-birds acquiring the song of the Silver-bill, and Dr. Greene states “ we have frequently heard of cases of birds that naturally sing in dumb show, or at least in such a low tone as to be inaudible to ordinary human ears, acquiring the notes of other w7arblers, and singing aloud.” We remember a Chestnut Finch (for some years in Dr. Simpson’s possession) which sang a full, loud song, much like that of a Canar}7. By the way, to describe the song of the typical Mannikins as “inaudible to ordinary human ears” seems somewhat of an exaggeration — it is very faint, but perfectly audible if the listener be near enough to the performer. 57 CORRESPONDENCE, THE MADAGASCAR WEAVER. Sir,— Mr. Cresswell asks for the experiences of other members concerning the temper of the Madagascar Weaver. May I, without presuming to lay down any general law, give my experience. Several years ago I bought a fine specimen and placed him in a large cage with a numerous collection of Waxbills and small finches. He proved to be the most amiable of birds, and remained for many months without causing any unpleasantness to his cage-mates, even allowing liimseif to be driven away from the seed-vessels by the smallest Waxbills. I afterwards gave him to a friend, who placed him in a cage with a similar collection of small finches. Here he proved himself a veritable demon, and had to be speedily removed to solitary confinement, where he eventually died. Why he should have behaved so differently in very similar surroundings I do not know. I have often seen this species kept in cages and aviaries with other smaller birds, and, as far as my experience goes, it is generally an inoffensive bird. C. S. Simpson. Sir, — I have had a Madagascar Weaver in my bird-room for about eight years. I formerly had two, as well as a Comoro Weaver; the latter killed one of the Madagascar birds and became so quarrelsome and danger¬ ous in 1897 that I had to remove it. The single male Madagascar Weaver is still in the same aviary with a mixed collection; it quarrels with Java Sparrows and Saffron-finches and sometimes chases other Weavers, but hurts nothing: young or small birds seem to be beneath its notice. A. G. Butper. Sir, — Replying to Mr. Cresswell’s query respecting this active and showy bird, from my own experience I should not hesitate to put one male amongst other birds, in even a moderate sized aviary, providing they all have sufficient roosting accommodation. So far circumstances have compelled me to keep all my birds in cages, one of which contains a very mixed lot; which system has the one advantage that for over two years I have been able to study' their little ways very closely'. For twelve months I had a very' bold healthy' Madagas¬ car Weaver in an ordinary single breeding-cage, 30 x 16 x 9 inches, along with two small Napoleons — one of these a very quiet inoffensive bird, and the other, though very' active, very harmless. Half a cocoauut was suspended from each back corner ; the two Napoleons always roosted on the edge of one, and the Foudia 011 the other. Even in this small cage the Foudia never quarrelled with the others although it resented their presence on its own cocoanut, driving them off with a fierce little cry. Since then I have made them a box-cage, 3 feet 6 inches square by 16 inches deep, with a half cocoauut in one top corner, a Hartz Canary-cage in the other, and two large forked apple-branches for perches. In this, for ten mouths, the same Foudia, Napoleons, and a Ribbon-fincli have lived peaceably, though never a day passes without my hearing the excited shrill cry of the Mada¬ gascar ejecting trespassers from the Hartz-cage, which it has been pleased to appropriate. 53 I am not surprised to hear of Mr. Cresswell’s experience with the Gouldian- finch. I have found the cock Gouldian so thoroughly meek as to be quite powerless against the fierce onslaughts of a vicious little Bronze Mannikin about a quarter of its own size, though the hen Gouldian has often stepped between and driven off the tormentor. I don’t think two Madagascar cocks would agree in a small space. I had another when using the smaller cage, and all went well until one day it became rather ill and weak, and the first one killed it (d). They seem indifferent to cold after being acclimatized. I had no heat in the room last winter, and, strange to say, the one I have shed its beautiful scarlet coat for the first time this November, being in half colour when I bought him twenty months ago. A. A. Pearson. CRIMSON FINCHES. Sir, — Perhaps the following may be interesting re Crimson Finches : To one of my friends in N. E. Queensland, who had often sent me birds, I had several times written, “ Please send me all the Crimson Finches you can get.” They were very scarce in that district, and for a long time I got other birds but no Crimson Finches; until a letter came which was quite a surprise to me, saying : “ At last 1 hope to please you by sending a good number of Blood Finches (the Queensland name for the Crimson Finch) ; the trappers have taken quite a large number, and I am sending, via Brisbane, eleven-aud-a-half dozen.” These were put on board one of the mail steamers in charge of an officer who was a friend of mine; he enclosed the bill, which was by far the largest amount I ever paid at one time for foreign birds — lie had paid a good price for them, as someone in Sydney had offered a high price. My friend had been more than kind : I wanted Crimson Finches, but not such a number, for although my aviaries were large I was puzzled to know what I should do with one hundred and fort)' of these birds. Unfortunately the ship was overrun with rats, and my friend had the greatest difficulty in protecting the birds from these midnight marauders ; from this, and another unforeseen circumstance, he lost more than half on the voyage home — -just sixty birds reached me. In a large aviary these birds were most peaceable, but on putting a pair into a waggon-shaped cage with other birds, the first day the cock Crimson Finch broke the leg of the only hen Parrot Finch I had— the leg was hanging by the skin only; this bird lived some months after with only one leg. In a large aviary they will agree ; but in a small one, or in a cage, they are the most combative of small birds, especially at breeding-time. James B. Housden. Sir, — I think it is undoubtedly a “ fallacy” for the Rev. C. D. Farrar to assume, because his specimens were peaceable, that good temper is ■characteristic of the species. I have had several specimens and made frequent attempts to keep them with other small finches, but they would certainly have killed every bird smaller than themselves, had they been permitted to remain among them. On one occasion I removed a pair (d) A bird which will thus kill another (when not breeding) is, we should say, too dangerous to be trusted in a mixed aviary. This experience of Mr. Pearson’s does not support the advice given in the first paragraph of his letter. — Ed. 59 of Crimson Finches, which had lived together for more than a year in perfect friendship, from their usual cage to a smaller one. The next morning I found the cock had most cruelly attacked and nearty killed the hen, apparently because he did not like the change of residence. C. S. Simpson. THE “ LONG-TAILED COMBASOU.” Sir, — Unless I am very blind, Mr. Fulljames’ bird is not wholly dark, but has white at any rate on the flanks; and I take it to be a specimen of the Resplendent Wlivdah, Vidua hypocherina (ear long before the Blackbirds began singing. The Butcher-bird in India is also a mimic, and I believe the American Mocking-bird is so. With reference to this subject, I have often wondered if any birds in the Counties frequented b}r Nightingales improve their songs by the intro¬ duction of Nightingale’s notes. Nightingales are not supposed to come to Devonshire, but they make an exception sometimes in favour of Honiton. The year before last I heard one, and this year there are at least two to be heard, day and night, close to my house. C. Harrison. THE BLUE SUGAR-BIRD ; THE EMERALD BIRD OF PARADISE. Sir, — I am sorry that my business arrangements have, for some time, prevented my replying to the main’ interesting queries which have of late appeared in our Magazine, and I am afraid some even of the direct enquiries addressed to me on bird matters have, for the same reason, been allowed to pass without reply. In the May number of the Magazine, however, there are so many items that require attention, that I have been impelled to write a few words. After expressing the great pleasure which I have in congratulating the Society upon having secured the services of such an artist as Mr. Smit, and of such a firm as Mintern Brothers for the exquisite reproductions of the artist’s sketches, I will begin at the beginning, and as I am doubtless one of those to whom Dr. Butler refers in the first paragraph of his interesting article on the Blue Sugar-bird, I will endeavour to supplement his paper with a few remarks from actual experience of the Dacnis cayana in captivity. My first specimen was a lieu, and a bird of this sex would appear, to any other than an expert, to be of quite a different species from the cock bird. The general plumage of the hen is of a bright metallic green, while the bod}’ plumage of the cock quite justifies the popular designation “ Blue Sugar-bird,” and the only fault possible to be found in the illustra¬ tion is the one pointed out by Dr. Butler, that it is, perhaps, not blue enough. My birds were fed upon fruit as a staple diet: oranges, grapes, bananas, pears, etc., as might be obtainable from time to time. They were also supplied with sponge cake moistened with scalded milk, and a mixture of steamed ant’s cocoons, yolk of egg, and cream cheese. Of the latter item they were extremely fond, and invariably picked out the pieces as soon as their food was given to them. (I have found cream cheese chopped fine a very valuable addition to the food for delicate insectivorous birds in captivity). Two or three mealworms daily were also offered, but these were not always eaten. My birds never seemed to ail until the last minute. Each seemed in perfect health up to the time it was found dead in its cage. It seems that such birds as these, and the more delicate insectivorous British birds, get food in freedom such as we are unable to successfully imitate in captivity (I anticipate Dr. Butler’s comment that birds do not get cream-clieese when at liberty) and that the fruit we are able to offer the fruit-eating foreign birds is a very poor substitute for the ripe fruit and tropical insects they have been taken away from. Any one who has eaten ripe bananas and ripe oranges, fresh from the tree, will appreciate this theory. I am obliged to say that I think Dr. Butler’s interesting article upon the Sugar-bird is entirely spoilt by his last paragraph. To reason that because a Blue Robin, a Pekin Robin, and a Blackbird have been kept in health upon a certain food it should be tried upon such birds as the Dacnis cayana is surely absurd)/). The three birds named will live upon almost anything, and the Licthrix can be kept nearly entirely upon seed. Does this make seed a desirable food for a Sugar-bird ? In thousands of cottages in England Blackbirds are kept in health and song on scraps from the table, supplemented by snails and earthworms. How long would a Dacnis (/) Any member of the Society who carefully reads my article on the Blue Sugar-bird will note that I did not recommend my regular mixture, as part of the dietary suitable for that bird, on the grounds stated by Mr. Fulljames ; but on the ground that it agreed with Tanagers and Zosterops. I mentioned the other species to prove that there could be nothing injurious in the mixture as has been asserted. — A. G. B. 139 live on this ? In my bird-rooms three distinct qualities of soft-food at leas are given. Sncli birds as Nightingales, Blackcaps, Bearded and Crested Tits, the various Warblers, and such of the fruit-eaters as will take it, are supplied with the mixture above mentioned as having been given to the Dacnis, with the addition of chopped lettuce, groundsel, watercress or other greenstuff. The aviaries are provided with the mixture I have before recommended in the Magazine (ground biscuit, crissel, ants’ cocoons, yolk of egg, dried flies, breadcrumbs, and boiled potato or grated carrot). The Thrushes, Blackbirds, and sucli-like get a proportion of the latter mixtnre supplemented (considerably) by ground dog-biscuit or more bread¬ crumbs and potato. Some discrimination in offering food to soft-bills •seems to me to be absolutely necessary, as, while the delicate birds would starve or die of indigestion on the Thrushes’ food, the Thrushes would burst themselves on the first-named mixture. To proceed to the letter of Mrs. Hartley ; I have pleasure in following Hr. Butler’s example by saying that my aviaries are always open to the inspection of members, by appointment of course. The Hon. and Rev. F. G. Dutton has already written an instructive and interesting article on the Parrot section of niv birds, and some member of journalistic tendencies and with a penchant for other foreign birds or “Britishers,” might, perchance, find material in such a visit for another article for our Magazine. I have no objection in complying with Dr. Butler’s hint in his foot¬ note to Mr. Cushny’s enquiry re Rmerald Bird of Paradise. Upon hearing from Mr. Cross that he had the bird, I went to Liverpool to see it. When I arrived it was, to all appearances, healthy, and was feeding freely' upon chopped beef and mealworms, and I was told it would eat ordinary “ insectivorous food.” The price asked was ^)ioo. After considerable bargaining I paid £60 for it, and brought it home next morning. When I got it home, I took the bird out of its cage with the intention of washing its peculiarly' beautiful wing coverts, and at once knew that I had made a mistake in not “ handling ” it before purchase. The bird was little more than a skeleton, and I knew at once that it would be a miracle if I could preserve it. The meat diet had “ scoured ” it almost to death. Unremitting attention was bestowed upon it without avail. With me it absolutely- refused meat, but ate freely of hot-house grapes and mealworms. Small cockroaches it wTould also take, but day by day' it got gradually weaker until, in about a fortnight, a series of fits, most painful to witness, ended its miserable life. I believe only' one other had ever been imported into England, and this, I understand, was brought by' a gentleman in his own yacht from the Arrow (or Aroo) Islands ( e ). These Islands form a small group immediately to the South of Papua (New Guinea) in lat. 6°-7Q S. I believe the only trade with the Islands is in cocoa-nuts and Bird of Paradise skins! ! The natives, it appears, have no notion of attempting to keep the birds in -captivity, and it is only by' the merest accident that a live specimen can be •obtained. Although my experience with my one bird was so particularly unfortunate, I have little hesitation in saying that if the bird could be provided with suitable food, not raw beef, there seems to be no reason why it could not be successfully imported and successfully kept. Henry J. Fueejames. (e.) Generally spelt “ Aru.” — A.G.B. 140 THE MAGAZINE. The members will doubtless have remarked the fact that the April and May issues consisted of twelve pages only, which is less than ever before, since the first year of the Society. The sole reason for this was that I had so little suitable matter in hand for publication. If the magazine is to be a continued success, it is essential that the members should be more active in contributing to its pages than they have been recently. I shall be glad to receive articles and letters for publication from any members, especially from some of those who have hitherto written little or nothing for the magazine. We are very much indebted to the faithful little baud of regular contributors, but it is unfair to expect them to do the whole of the work. I should also be glad to hear from, several who used to write for the magazine but who have not done so lately. Horatio R. Fieemer. THE RATE SIR H. S. BOYNTON, BART. The Society has lost a very able and experienced aviculturist through the death on the nth April last, after a long illness, of its esteemed Vice- President, Sir Henry S. Boynton, Bart. He had an interesting collection of living birds within his beautiful grounds at Burton Agnes, in East Yorkshire, keeping, at various times, Emus, Rheas, a fine lot of Ornamental Pheasants, most of the British Fresh-water Wild Ducks and Geese, Eagle Owls, and a very fine pair of Golden Eagles the female of which laid a clutch of eggs during her owner’s illness. Sir Henry, for several summers up to 1897, had been in the habit of bringing back with him from Norway, after the fishing season, various- interesting birds from that country, including Eagle and Snowy Owls, Siberian Jays, and usually a fine lot of young Gos-liawks, sometimes as- many as six or eight in number. He spared no trouble in rearing these birds- in their own country, and in bringing them across the North Sea: and, being in the pink of condition, and often already partly trained, the Gos¬ hawks used, when their education was completed a little later, to afford their captor, and several other falconers in different parts of England, excellent sport with rabbits and other quarry. But it is as a successful keeper of the insectivorous birds that Sir Henry excelled. His system was, in the case of the more delicate kinds, to absolutely exclude all farinaceous food, giving nothing to the Mocking Birds, Shanias, Nightingales, Blue and Rock Thrushes, and Blackcaps, but ants’ eggs, Carl Capelle food, preserved yolk of egg, and a few currants,, the above moistened and given as a crumbling paste. He considered a supply of course gritty sand a matter of great importance ; and his cages were all roomy, allowing the inmates plenty of room for exercise. To this treatment, and to the above diet especially, he attributed the fact that liis- insectivorous birds always seemed in the best of condition, moulted clean, and that they were absolutely free from those troublesome fits that so often shorten the lives of these more or less delicate species when kept in confinement. THE Bvtcultural fllbaga3tnet BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY. VOL. V. — No. 57. All rights reserved. JULY, 1899. THE CORDON BLEU. Estrilda phcenicotis. By Reginald Phieeipps. My early experiences of this species were limited to a Small Birds’ bird room — long since closed — in which they were practically lost amid a number of Waxbills, Mannikins, and the like, all flying loose together. Under these conditions the}^ seemed amiable, inoffensive little creatures, without much character or spirit ; but, given healthy specimens to start with, I found no difficulty in keeping them alive and well. I had not, however, tried the Cordon Bleu in the garden ; and, on the 15th February, 1898, noticing a nice looking pair, I purchased them forthwith, with a view to giving them a trial of outdoor life as soon as the weather became warmer. By the 15th April following they were in perfedt health and condition ; and on that day I loosed them in the garden. On and from the 17th May, I noticed that the male had become exceedingly savage, attacking all birds (but see exception below), irrespective of size, that approached the particular region over which he had proclaimed a protectorate ; and I found that a nest was being built among some Virginia creeper which covers an upright structure in the aviary, on the almost due east side, five feet from the ground. During the spring and summer, the Long-tailed Grassfinches (five) did much mischief, appropriating quite a number of other birds’ nests for nesting or squatting purposes. One pair tried very hard to obtain possession of the Cordon Bleus’ nest ; but the male Cordon fought like a little demon, and succeeded in keeping off his formidable antagonists. This same pair hovered about and menaced the Cordons’ nest all through the summer and autumn, at one time building a nest just four inches above it, measuring from the nearest points; and they took possession of it the instant the Cordons were removed to warmer quarters for the winter. 142 The first clutch of eggs came to nothing. In July they nested again, but without any feature of general interest coming under my notice. I fear I hardly thought of them. Early in August these birds were again nesting: on the 3rd of that month I noticed them mating. On October 7th, on peeping into the aviary from a window, I found three Cordon Bleus feeding below me. So nearly alike in size were they that, had I not known that there had been but two in the garden, it would not have occurred to me that one w’as a young bird. Doubtless I had seen this young bird before, but without noticing it. The young Cordon seemed to be as long and as large as his parents, though actually he was less bulky. The blue seemed as brilliant as that of his father : he was much more brilliant than his mother. The beak was pinky white merging into black at the tip, and the crimson ear-patch did not appear until later, but otherwise he was practically in the plumage of the adult male. From that time I kept my eye on him. Only once did I see him fed, and that was by his father. At first his baby note was occasionally uttered, and this was not unlike the squeak of the young Parrot Finch. The parents later went to nest for the fourth time ; but the leaves of the Virginia creeper were, falling, and soon the nest was left fully exposed. One day there was a great uproar in the aviary, caused by some dozen birds who had become strangely excited at the sight of the nest and its occupant, and Were hovering around it, the little mother, greatly concerned, hopping nervously about in the rear of the mob. Suddenly the male darted out from the nest at his nearest foe and was back again — all in a flash : to have entered into combat with one bird would have left the eggs exposed to the depredations of the others, and he was too wary for that. I drove the birds away, and the attack was not renewed. These eggs likewise came to nothing. To what extent these numerous failures were due to the cold, or to the disturbances, I cannot sa)^, but doubtless the cold had a good deal to do w7ith it. It was not until quite late in the autumn that I became aware that a pair of innocent-looking Bearded Tits were inveterate egg-stealers : possibly they may have had a finger in the pie. It is curious, but not one of the birds ever attempted to defend its nest from their snake-like approaches, which I had witnessed on many occasions without taking in the full significance of their movements. All the Cordons’ nests were independent domed dry-grass- M3 lined - with - feathers affairs built in the Virginia creeper, in practically the same spot, the later eggs being laid in a nest attached to but just below the first, perhaps a trifle more protected from the rain, and with the aperture more difficult of detection. The male sat on the eggs during the greater part of the day: when the nest was in danger he always seemed to be in it. I think usually the female took a spell the first part of the morning ; at night, both, I suppose, slept in the nest. In the last nest doubtless they were joined at night b}^ the young bird, for in the garden the father was never seen to drive his son. The spirit and bravery of this bird were a feature in the character of the species which was quite new to me. During the winter they have been qniet and peaceable with all birds but the little son. All three passed the winter in the house, and are still alive and well. They never associated with the other birds, but kept much to themselves. Not that, as a rule, they kept all together. The parents were inseparable, sitting side by side on a tall eucalyptus tree ; they kept quite quiet, wisely regarding the winter as a season of rest ; they had done their work right valiantly, and were recuperating. Not so the baby. Dike other silly young people, he has been wanting to nest for some months, and generally sat in another tall eucalyptus tree, opposite his parents, singing away to the wife of his imagination, — for which tomfoolery he occasionally received a whack over the head from his sober-minded pater. One day, an interesting conversation took place in the eucalyptus tree, between the father and mother, of which I may venture to give a translation for the benefit of those who are not conversant with the language of this species : — “Dad.” “Well, Dove?” “I’ve been thinking, Dad.” “ Don’t be silly, Dove.” “ I do believe that you and I have done something that no Cordon has ever done before.” “ Think so, Dove ? ” “ Who ever heard of a Cordon rearing a baby in this shivering country, eh, Dad ! ” “ Perhaps not, Dove. What does the Avicultural say ? ” “ Says that the babies all die off like flies ; s’pose, Dad, it’s too cold for the feathering, or the3r don’t mix the pap proper.” “ Aha ! getting conceited in your old age, my Dove.” “Well, now; just look at him ! was there ever such a Bleu ? and as like his Dad as two Cordons.” “ Ahem ! ” “Dad.” “Yes, Dove?” “We must get a wife for our Tittle Boy Blue.” “ Cold, isn’t it, Dove ?” “ All the more need M4 oi a wife, Dad ; how would you like to be left all alone in the cold ! ” “ True for }rou, Dove.*' “ And, Dad, we must teach him how to hatch eggs.” “ Then j^ou’ll be a granny , Dove.” “ Hum ; and he’s no business to be making a granny of me : more like his sister.” “ But he can’t get on without a wife, Dove.” “ Not so sure ; she mightn’t agree with him. Shouldn’t like our Little Boy Blue to be hen-pecked.” “ But the cold , Dove ; the cold." “ Bother the cold, Dad.” “ Let’s snooze over it, Dove.” “ Let’s.” And they snoozed. On the 23rd January, 1899, I had a view of the two males together in an exceptionally good light. I11 their colourings they were practically identical — with one exception. Not only was the ear-patch of the father of a much deeper and richer colour than that of the son, but it was much larger, probably twice as large. At the time (June) that I am writing, however, the young bird seems the more brilliant of the two — he is absolutely perfect. I have obtained a wife for him. The bride was received with much spitefulness by the old mother ; but this is rather characteristic of mothers-in-law generally. The four birds are now in the garden. The old parents have settled down very quietly in their old quarters ; but alas for the vanity and conceit of young people ! The young couple built a large, untidy, Sparrow-like nest at the very top of a poplar tree, in the most conspicuous and exposed place in the whole aviary ; and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that nest, — and in a few days it was nothing but a sodden, shapeless mass of rubbish. The}^ have learned an important lesson of life, however, more quickly and thoroughly than their masters often do, for they have since gone to nest in a quiet secluded spot under a shed. LORD DERBY’S PARRAKEET. A pair of Parrakeets, of especial interest to aviculturists, on account of their great rarity, have recently been acquired by the Zoological Society and are now located in the Parrot-house of the Society’s Gardens. These are the first examples of the Derbian Parrakeet that have ever occupied the Gardens. In fact only one previous example appears to have been known. This bird, from which the species was named, found its way into Lord Derby’s aviaries at Knowsley, where it lived for some time. 145 After its death it was preserved for the Derby Museum, at Liverpool, where it is now to be seen. An excellent coloured plate of this, the type specimen, was published in the “ Proceed¬ ing^” of the Zoological Society for the year 1850, together with a description of the bird by Mr. Louis Fraser. The following is an extract from his communication, dated November nth, 1850. “ The first specimen to which I would wish to draw the attention of the Society, is a Parrakeet of large size, which I propose calling Palceoi'nis derbianus. . . . The specimen has been for many years in this collection, and I have chosen for its specific name that of its noble owner. The species is easily distinguished from all other members of the genus by its large size and the colours of the bill, head and breast.” Although much larger, the Derbian Parrakeet has many points of resemblance to the Banded or Javan Parrakeet (P. fasciatci J ; it differs greatly however from that species in the colour of the breast, which is an exquisite lilac in P. derbyana and decidedly vinous in P. fasciata, the head of the rarer species is also much bluer ; and Count Salvadori has pointed out another important difference in the colour of the under wing-coverts, which are vinous in P. derbyana and green in P. fasciata. The following is a short description of the colouring of P. derby ana : Upper parts light green ; a broad moustache on the lower part of the cheeks, forehead and lores, black ; crown and ear-coverts violet-blue ; underparts lilac ; bill black. The species is said to inhabit the interior of China. The two birds now in the Gardens are remarkably fine specimens and there would appear to be every prospect of their thriving. They are not so bright in colour as Wolf’s drawing in the “ Proceedings,” but they are probably still immature. The acquisition of birds of such extraordinary rarity is a matter for sincere congratulation, and they are very well worth a visit from all who are interested in this group of Old World Parrakeets. _ D. Seth-SmiTh. NESTING OF THE DHYAL. By the Rev. C. D. Farrar. The Dhyal is very seldom imported into England, and, when he is, always commands a high price. It is nearly always the cocks that come over as in the case of so many other species. The cock Dhyal is like a miniature English Magpie, brilliant black and white, and is no doubt nearly related to the Shamah, as the two species quarrel abominably. Dhyals are very 146 quarrelsome birds with their own kind, and to keep two cocks together will mean speedy death to one. The hen Dhyal is the rarest of rare birds ; she is smaller and slighter than her mate ; and where he is black she is a delicate lavender. I was fortunate enough when up in London last autumn to secure five Dhyals, just as they came off the ship, and one of them was a hen. It was a case of take all or none, so I took all. They were wonderfully tame, and I think consisted of an old cock and his four nestlings ; as one was much larger than any of the others. On reaching home, I had to cage off three of the cocks separately to prevent murder ; the pair I let go in a big indoor aviary, where they soon came into magnificent feather and where they have remained ever since. Two of the cocks I sold, and I reserved the odd one in case of accidents, so as to have two strings to my bow. One day in May when I was showing my birds to a brother fancier, I was going to point out the hen Dhyal as the rarest of my possessions, when to my horror I could not see her any¬ where. I feared she must be dead or had slipped out unknown to me and got lost. After looking most carefully all round the aviary and when about to give up the hunt in despair, I suddenly espied a long tail sticking out of a nest box. At first it gave me a horrid turn as I thought she had crept into a box to die there ; as I had no suspicion of nesting. On getting a chair to look I was intensely relieved to see the tail move, so I knew it was all right and a case of eggs. Of course I had to have a look (was it not excusable if rash ?_) I seized my opportunity when Mrs. Dhyal was off feeding, and to my joy found three eggs. They are rather small for the size of the bird, pale sea-green in colour, heavily blotched with chocolate at the bigger end, and rounded in shape. The hen sat admirably and hatched out two young birds, the remaining egg was clear. The young ones when fledged just resembled the old birds, but were very yellow at the base of the beak ; and were of the male persuasion. I fed on mealworms and black ‘ clocks.’ Later, the youngsters were both killed by the cock ; one on one day, the other on the next, on the floor. I was of course sorry in a way, but these things will happen, and cock Dhyals are very quarrelsome ! ! ! This is by way of consolation. 147 They were two grand young birds, and I am sure the cock slew them out of jealously ; though he evidently is of the opinion of Horace : “ Nec pueros coram populo Medea trucidat.” He must have done the deed ; as there are nothing but tiny finches in th# aviary. They are busy with a new nest, and this time I shall remove Master Dhyal as soon as the eggs are laid, as though he is useful up to that time and very ornamental, he is decidedly blood¬ thirsty to budding young cocks, and I don’t believe he takes any share in the feeding ; at least I never saw him feed. REVIEW. Captive Song-Birds. A pamphlet issued by the Society for the Protection of Birds. (No. 3 1 J. It may be questioned whether it is not wraste of time to notice this, or any of the leaflets issued by a Society whose object evidently is to put an end to aviculture ; but the present one is so monstrous in its demands, and so silly in its assertions, that it can hardly be passed over without comment ; if only to show to what lengths fictitious humanitarianism and fanaticism will lead their votaries. The opening and closing lines of the leaflet are practically opposed to the study of all birds in captivity ; and the difference between keeping a bird in a cage measuring only a few cubic inches and in an extensive aviary are regarded as represent¬ ing mere “ degrees of questionable treatment.” The argument, if such it can be called, that because a bird is fitted for a life of freedom in the open-air, it must necessarily suffer and be miserable when its liberty is more or less restricted, is one that nobody familiar with birds could have used : it is well-known that many birds, when they escape from captivity, soon miss the comforts and luxuries of aviary- or cage-life, and voluntarily return to it. The writer hints that but few species become habituated to captivity, and he unblushingly asserts that the life is an un¬ healthy one. As a matter of fact, there are few species which have not been habituated to captivity amongst those which have been kept ; and probably none which could not be. As to the unhealthiness of cage-birds, what evidence has been collected on the subject tends to show that they live far longer, and exhibit infinitely more perfect plumage, when properly looked after in an aviary, than they ever do in a wild state. 14B Whatever the writer may imagine, and he seems more full of theory than fact, no bird will sing when it feels ill : it must be what the students of bird-song call ‘ stout ’ before it will sing at all. Song in birds is believed to have originated in shouts of defiance, one male singing against another ; it is now certainly used to bring the hen into subjection. If no hen be present and yet the male sings, he must be in abundant vigour and unable to contain himself. One of the most ignorant observations made by the writer of this reprehensible pamphlet, is to the effect that birds cannot be studied properly in aviaries ; but only in their wild state. The truth is that many birds can be properly studied in no other manner than in aviaries. Many scientific collectors in many years have frequently failed to discover a solitary fact as to the method of nidification, the colour and number of eggs, etc., of a bird ; yet, when transferred to an aviary, the whole of the bird’s life has been laid bare. The study of birds in a wild state may even be misleading : it led Charles Dixon to the false conclusion that inherited instinct was a myth, and that birds built their nests in imitation of those wherein they were born ; whereas aviculture proved conclusively that, after hundreds of generations of caged life, a bird turned loose in a large aviary immediately constructed the nest of its remote ancestors : even the songs and call-notes of birds heard in a state of freedom are imperfectly heard and often incorrectly rendered by naturalists ; and doubtless, where two species are together in a thicket, the notes of one are often mistaken for those of the other. The final assertion — that the case of Canaries differs from that of other cage-birds, yet nevertheless sets a bad example and encourages a “ detestable trade” — is really almost too absurd. The writer fails utterly to see that the rule which applies to wild birds, must apply to all birds which have been originally wild ; then, when he includes Canaries in his reprobation of aviculture, he does not see that (to be consistent) he is bound to include Pigeons and all kinds of domesticated Fowls. Nay, more, I must insist that, if it be cruel for man to “have dominion over the fowl of the air,” it is equally cruel for him to keep in subjection any living creature ; and I am not sure that he ought not him¬ self (in that case) to return to a condition of irresponsible savagery. Of a truth anyone who could calmly swallow such nonsense as the writer of “ Captive Song-birds ” solemnly indites, cannot be intellectually far removed from that early condition of his species. A. G. Butler. 149 CORRESPONDENCE. BIRD NOTES. Sir, — I have a pair of Chinese Ring-necked Pheasants. The hen has laid to-day (June 14) her thirty-fifth egg this season. Is not this a record number for one bird ? (a) I have a hybrid between a German Fancy Pigeon and a Zanzibar Half-collared Dove, a most beautifully-marked cock bird. This has paired with a hen Barbary Dove, and has had several nests, but the eggs are always unfertile. If any of our members are near Sydenham, I shall be pleased, any afternoon, for them to see my collection, but should prefer (like my friend and neighbour, Dr. Butler) a previous appointment. Perhaps Dr. Butler might have been thinking of my experience, which may be interesting to our readers. Some three years ago, my birds were sent to a Foreign Bird Show at an Exhibition in the North of London. Amongst the large crowds of visitors, I made the acquaintance of a well-dressed gentleman who seemed greatly interested in foreign birds. He came several times in the twelve days the Exhibition was held, and left his card with me, asking permission to call at Sydenham to see my aviaries. He came, and the second time brought a lady with him ; but as it was too late to see the birds he said he would call again, which he did, one wet afternoon. Unfortunately, for me, while in the aviary, a friend, who was returning home to South Africa, came to wish me good-bye. I left him in the aviary, saying he had better wait until the rain had left off ; he left a short time after, calling at the house for his umbrella, and, with many thanks, leaving word with the servant that he hoped to call and see me again. The next day I missed a pair of Parson Finches — sometime before I imported from Queensland 60 Gouldian Finches, with several fine Parson Finches, these were all in one large cage. My man could not account for their disappearance. I was then a little suspicious of my visitor, and found he had stolen a small travelling cage, 10 Gouldians, and the pair of Parson Finches — the servant noticed he had a small parcel under his arm, done up in a newspaper. We tried to trace them, but in vain : the name was a false one. Some time after, at the West London Police Court, a person was sentenced to six months imprisonment for robbery. I then found that he was the one who had stolen the birds, and all that was left was one Parson Finch. This well-dressed gentleman with light kid gloves was a smart London thief. The greater part of my birds will be at the same place next month— Agricultural Hall, Islington, July 24th to August 8th — at the Triennial Exhibition held there. I am afraid I may be a little suspicious, this time, of inviting friends to Sydenham — especially if they are fashionably dressed in light overcoat, silk hat, and light kid gloves. James B. Housden. (a) Mr. Housden informs me that, since he penned these notes, the bird has con¬ tinued to lay daily, the number of eggs being now about fifty. — A. G. B. A hen Pheasant will frequently lay over fifty eggs.— E. G. B. M.-W. Sir, — I have been wondering what luck in breeding members of the •Avicultural Society on your side of the Channel have had this year ? Better, I hope, than my7self. Perhaps some will kindly give their results in the magazine. Except Redrumps, I have not had a single bird hatched (that I know of) of any description. My Many-colours have done nothing yet, and are now moulting. I lost my hen Turquoisine a mouth or two ago and, not being able to get another, fear breeding this Parrakeet is not very likely7, with me, this y7ear. My7 New Zealands have done nothing at all, although they appear to be in the best of health, and are not moulting. I had about 18 eggs laid b3T two Golden-crowned New Zealand Parrakeets between January and the beginning of April — at several times — and as both birds sat and all the eggs were clear, I conclude I have two liens instead of a pair. A pair of Yellow Budgerigars in one of my aviaries have not made a start yet. Small birds, Finches, etc., are doing absolutely7 nothing, and of these I have lost a good many. I fancy the peculiar weather we have had is chiefly7 the cause of so much non-success jfi breed¬ ing, and the losses of the small birds. The early part of the year was too mild, and probably brought the birds too soon into nesting condition; then followed cold, and checked them, causing death to some, and upsetting breeding operations with others. On the whole, my losses have been greater, and breeding results less, this season than in any other since I have kept birds. I had too fine cock Redrumps leave the nest last month, and the parents have four young again two of which seem to be liens : but tlieyi are scarcely fledged enough to tell exactly7. The old cock acted again this y7ear in precisely the same manner as last — he commenced maltreating the young of the first nest as soon as the hen was about to lay7 her second clutch, and before they7 could feed themselves. I had to take him out of the cage ; and the hen laid, without him, five eggs, four of which were good and hatched. The two first young were removed a few days before the second lot hatched, and the old cock was put back to the hen again ; he is feeding with her as if nothing had happened. I suppose he is used to be thus dealt with, for he seems to know what is coming when he misbehaves himself toward his young and I go to take him away. I have at present afresh pair of Australian Crimson Finches — the cock imported and the hen aviary-bred-— having lost my old pair, “the fighters,” during the bad weather. They7 are birds of a different disposition from the other pair, not such bullies, and are 011 the best of terms with each other, which was not the case with the first pair — the cock chased and fought the hen whenever he had the chance. I have come to the conclusion that some pairs are more pugnacious than others, and the species is generally addicted to worry other birds lodged with them. I should not care to put other birds of tlieir size, still less smaller ones, in their company, except in a large aviary containing plenty7 of bushes for shelter from their chasing and attacks. A. SAVAGE. THE AGE OF CAGE-BIRDS. Sir, — With regard to the age to which little foreign birds live in captivity, I have an Avadavat flying about in my7 bird-room which I bought in August, 1892 ; it had then been some time in captivity and was quite tame. It was (until a short time ago — when it met with an accident) in beautiful plumage and brilliant colour, only getting a little greyish about the head. (Miss) E. E. WEST. THE STORY OF A BLUE ROBINS’ NEST. Sir, — As I see you invite members, who have not hitherto done so, to write something for the magazine, I wonder if the story of my Blue Robins’ nest would be of any interest. Perhaps someone who has kept these birds will kindly tell me if my experience is the usual one. I have a handsome pair which have been in my possession a year-and- a-half. Last summer the hen laid four eggs, coloured a pretty greenish blue, and sat for some time, but with no result. This year, towards the end of May, when I began to hope the cold winds were over, I again fastened up the nest — a cigar box — in their cage, and provided hay, bass, moss, etc., the birds were highly delighted, and at once set to work carrying the hay, etc. They spent very little time over the nest, however, but the hen immediately began to lay. On the ist June, as nearly as I could judge, she began to sit, and sat more or less diligently, but would often come off when I went into the room, to see if I had not some mealworms for her. I always gave her some, and she would then, generally, return to her duties ; but sometimes remained off quite a long time, taking exercise and amusing herself, so that I did not much expect a favourable result. The cock bird was very attentive, and rarely ate any mealworms himself while his wife was sitting, but would carefully kill them and then hand them over to her — she seemed capable of swrallowing an unlimited number. On the morning of the 13th of June, thinking it just possible there ?night be a young bird, I gave them a few extra mealworms, plenty of ants’ cocoons, and a fresh dish of their usual food (Abrahams’ mixture and preserved yolk, mixed with breadcrumbs and made slightly damp). I then proceeded to attend to the wants of the other birds, but, hearing an unusual noise, returned to my Robins to see what was taking place, and there was Mr. Robin flying in an excited state about the cage, flapping his beautiful wings and uttering little cries of joy and triumph, while he dangled something in his beak. with which he appeared to wish to feed his wife. The something proved to be his first-born child ! Mrs. Robin did not seem to quite approve of the performance, and, with open beak, flew to the rescue, saying plainly “ Give the baby to me Robert, you are too rough.” She then proceeded to try to take it from him, and, thinking the nestling would be torn to pieces, I interfered, and it fell to the floor of the cage — quite dead, of course. It was a nice fat little thing — I am not sure if it had ever been fed— it may have had a little preserved yolk. I tried to catch the cock and take him away, but the cage being large (3ft. long by 3'ft. high) I found it impossible, without frightening the birds too much, so left the eggs to their fate. The hen then returned to her nest, and, later in the da}-, hatched another poor little nestling, with which the parents, no doubt, went through the same Punch-aud-Judy performance, for I found it dead at the bottom of the cage (no attempt had been made to feed this one). Next morning, on taking out the nest, I found another egg, with a bird apparently alive, but I thought it might as well be drowned as share the fate of the others, so I put it in water. There were still two more eggs, making five in all. The parent birds seemed very glad to have no further trouble, and, as soon as the nest was gone, both at once took a bath — eggs were all very well, but babies quite a different thing! When the nest-box w-as taken down, there was nothing in it but a few strands of liay twisted round : they had taken out all the stuff they put in it at first — it is a wonder the eggs were not broken, as they conld roll about on the bottom of the box. Is it usual for Blue Robins to treat their families in this inhuman manner, or was there something wrong in my feeding or management ? My birds are very tame, and my presence never seems to frighten them. (Miss) E. E. West. THE MAGAZINE. Sir, — I see you complain of want of subjedt-ni after for the magazine. Could not members record their acquisitions, if they got anything out of the common ? Mr. Fulljames’ most interesting account of the Emerald Bird of Paradise suggests this idea to me. It is a great pity that no one will comment on my notes (b). It is very unfair to any bird that its character should be left in the hands of one man. Short notes may often contain a great deal of information, and yet not take much time to write. F. G. Dutton. THE TORTOISE AND THE TOAD. Sir, — At page 136, Mr. Farrar tells us of the Macaw and the cat's meat; perhaps the following story may be allowed a corner in the Avicultural, although it is not about a bird. The heroine of the story is known to my sister, who told it to me but a few days ago. A lady recently was going away from home. She had a favourite tortoise, and, being solicitous for its welfare during her absence, resolved on the following course for ensuring its safety. She carefully packed it up in a boot-box, securely fastened the box, and stowed it away on the top of a cabinet. She was absent for from five to six weeks. O11 her return, without the faintest foreboding of evil, she took down the boot-box, unwrapped the creature, and, lo, 'twas — dead. Greatly aggrieved, and with the feeling that somehow she had been deeply wronged, the lady poured forth her woes into the rather unsympathetic ears of my sister. The latter reminded her how that previously she had always fed the tortoise regularly, on bread and milk, lettuce, etc., to the full, and how could she have supposed that it would have lived for over five weeks without food, water, or air ! The lady evidently regarded my sister’s remarks as absurd, and gave the following crushing reply. She had read in books, in good books too, how that toads had been found at the bottom of coal pits hundreds of yards deep entombed in blocks of coal, where they had been living for — 0I1 ! for ever so many years without food, water, or air, and when released had hopped about joyful and active, so of course the tortoise ought to have lived a paltry six weeks in the boot-box perfectly well. Reginald Phielipps. (i)We heartily wish that those members who have experience with Amazon Parrots would adopt Mr. Dutton's suggestion.— Ed. THE Hvtcultural iHbaga3tnet BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY. VOL. V. — NO. 58. All rights reserved. AUGUST, 1899. MY AVIARIES. By O. E. Cresswell. My apology for the early reappearance of my signature in our Magazine is that I learn from the Secretary that “copy” has of late been short. It is some time, I think, since any member of the Society has described his or her aviary. I was asked in our earlier days to write some account of my own, but hesitated to do so : firstly, because my birds’ abodes, of one kind and another, are so many that a description of them all would be wearisome, and, secondly, because I was afraid of seeming to imply that my own arrangements were a model for others, instead of being very sensible, as I am, of their many short¬ comings. I have learnt, however, that aviculturists at least derive pleasure from seeing and reading of the aviaries of others, and I expressly preface this paper with the statement that I do not put these notes together as an example of what is best ; but simply as an account of what are my own arrangements. My aviaries are in position unlike others that I know : they are very scattered. This arrangement has its advantages and its disadvantages. Pro — It is pleasant, when walking about the grounds, here and there to come upon some fresh nook with its aviary. It is an advantage, too, to have them in widely different situations, almost in different climates, so that birds can have complete changes ; e.g., through the summer they can reside in a cool umbrageous retreat, in winter on a sheltered bank which catches every possible ray of sunshine. Contra — It is, of course, much more expensive to erect a number of isolated aviaries, than to erect the same number of the same size in a row under one roof. There is, too, great increase of labour in attending to aviaries thus located ; and this is added to, in my case, by the fact that some of them must stand 150 feet, or even 200 feet, higher than others. Again, aviaries so placed must be somewhat open, not exactly to the ravages of vermin, but to 153 scares from them. I will presently relate some precautions adopted against these catastrophies. Roughly speaking, my abodes of birds are of three kinds : i.— Rooms in which they live in cages. 2.— Isolated aviaries in which they live about the grounds. 3. — A large wired enclosure intended, as the trees and hedges in it mature, to be a natural “ paradise.” 1. Many Parrots and Parralceets, and a few small birds, oscillate (of course, weather permitting) in their cages between garden terraces and a glazed verandah by day, and rooms by night. Some of these are ordinary dwelling rooms, others a comfortable suite of abodes over the stable — though cold in winter. There is nothing worth relating of them. A little account, however, of my birds’ cottage may possibly be of interest. In a lofty part of the grounds, which, to say the least, are not on a level, stands a little stone ivy-clad building with sham battlements. It was probably built late in the last century as “a folly”; then it descended to be an indifferent dwelling- house, and then was approaching the stage of ruin, when I restored it, opened out a blocked-up window or two, and turned it to its present use. Why such a building should ever have been termed “ a folly ” I can’t comprehend. I look upon the indi¬ vidual who built it as a very wise man ; for, firstly, he chose a position with exceptionally beautiful views of six counties— four English and two Welsh — and a fine panorama of a district of the winding W}^e ; and secondly, he designed an upper room singularly well suited for my birds’ comfort. There are two rooms, both of which have chimneys and had fire-places. As the building is on the liill-side, the lower room is partially underground on the North side, and on the South is approached by a flight of steps. The upper room is reached by a few stone steps from the outside on the North. It has two good South windows, and one West one. It is the winter quarters of many foreign Doves, a few Parrakeets, and a tribe of smaller birds. Some of their cages are ranged on a long table, the length of the room ; others are on stands and tables which run on castors, and enable the birds to be moved into the fullest sunshine. A coppice-clad hill rises still farther to the North and East, and gives protection to the building from cold winds. In lieu of the fire¬ place there is now a stove, which burns coke. On all evenings, from mid-October to April, which promise to be at all cold, a fire is lit about 5 p.m., and, if properly managed, keeps the room comfortable until 8 a.m. When there is severe frost, it is again made up at 10 p.m. In almost all weathers one window is thrown 154 open, according to the wind, for part of the day, and in warm weather, one or two are left open all day and night. During the seven years that the room has been put to this use, I have never had any kind of epidemic. Many birds are taken in temporarily as invalids from outdoor quarters, and almost invariably recover, and I cannot remember any instance of a bird having been serious¬ ly chilled in it. In such severe weather as February, 1S95, the thermometer almost touched freezing point on several nights, but not for long ; though in an outdoor aviary, not fifty yards off, it twice stood at 30 above Zero. The Waxbills continued blithe and health}7, and a Cordon Bleu is now in blooming health, which has been continuously in the room since May, 1892, save for about five months last year, when he was out of doors. I attribute the success of this room to the many hours through which, in fine weather, the sun pours into it, and to the purity of the hill air which blows into it. 2. I have many aviaries of wood and wire. They are, as I have said, scattered about, nearly all within the higher and carefully enclosed pleasure grounds of about nine acres, but even so it is impossible entirely to guard against occasional scares from vermin. Most of them have second lines of defence. I have many large enclosures — some for adult Poultry, others for coops and the rearing of chickens and foreign Pheasants. The fences are six and seven feet high, and wire netting of small mesh is carried a foot into the ground. Most of the aviaries are placed within these enclosures, which are a great additional protection to the inmates. It is no easy matter to select places for aviaries, having regard both to appearances and the comfort of the birds. I never put one up in a hurry, but try possible positions in all kinds of weather — searching March winds, Autumn fogs, and bright frosty mornings. The result is that, if one wants to find a pleasant nook on a not-altogether-pleasant day, it is almost invariably to be found on the South or West side of an aviary. In this climate, I need hardly say that the majority of them are designed to catch every ray of sun : only two are under the pleasant shade of apple and walnut trees through the middle of the louger days. My aviaries are nearly all on the same plan, with many variations in minor details. Their usual width is 6 feet, their height 6 or 7 feet at the side to 8 or 9 feet in the centre of the span ; and their length from 14 to 24 feet. Their narrowness may surprise some aviculturists ; it is not of choice, but almost of necessity, for nearly all are on sloping ground, and every foot of width adds to the amount of brickwork, sometimes a veritable 155 wall, necessaty to support the lower side. As far as possible, they run North and South ; at the North end is the inner house, of course all thickly match-boarded, and the boarding of the roof is covered with corrugated iron. I find it convenient, for the catching of small birds, to have a door covered with fine wire netting between the house and the outer flight, though, as a rule, such doors are fastened open. The outer flights differ greatly in detail ; they and the inner houses are all span-roofed, with ornamental iron-work running along the ridge. The flight of one aviary is entirely boarded over, and the whole length of its Eastern side is boarded too. Most of them are half roofed with boarding and zinc, and half with fine wire netting. The roof of one is partially glazed instead of being boarded ; this seems to suit the Waxbills and small Finches as a residence for Summer, and even till late Autumn. It is an additional protection against wind if the sides of the flight, or even the most exposed side, are boarded for a few feet next to the inner house. The floors of the outer flights, when entirely roofed over, are covered with river-sand and fine gravel nearly a foot deep ; those partially roofed over are gravelled in the same way under cover, and the open part is covered with rich earth to the same level as the gravel. Here I plant shrubs, by preference climbers trained up the netting, elder, box, wild plum, and especially China rose and French honeysuckle (the latter grows most rapidly and is deliciously fragrant all the Summer), in them I tie little baskets, nearly flat-bottomed, in which Doves of all kinds delight to nest. For small birds I tie cocoanuts to nails and perches, generally under cover, and put small box-cages on shelves in the house, of course with the doors fastened open. Many perches, mostly of natural boughs and twigs, are placed all about both in the inner houses and the outer flights. I may here give two hints. Firstly, that the makers of such aviaries often send iron cross-rods to add to their stability : it is well to insist upon wood being used for this purpose ; iron is dangerous to feet alike in great cold and great heat. Secondly, it is best to have wire netting, both of strong gauge (not less than 19) and small mesh ; there is no great difference between the prices of iin. and Ain. mesh — the latter will confine the smallest birds, and can scarcely be bent. As I have said, the woodwork of my aviaries is all raised upon brickwork ; they are not safe without it, and where rodent vermin abound (which, fortunately, is not the case with me) fine strong wire netting should be laid over the entire area under 156 ground. The floors of most of my inner houses are of wood, somewhat raised above the level of the ground outside ; those for small birds are thickly covered with river sand, for large ones with pine sawdust. 3. My large enclosure — “The Paradise” we call it — has only lately been finished, and is, of course, very bare of foliage ; but yet much less so than might be expected, for when shrubs are moved from one’s own grounds (as many of mine were) they bear transplanting better than when procured from nurserymen. I often longed to see the agile flight of my foreign Doves in a larger space than my aviaries afforded ; now and then one escaped — once many — and how happy did they look flitting from tree to tree ! Every season, too, nest after nest was lost from the intrusion and persecution of pairs who set their affections on the same abode. My first idea was to enclose a bit of a wood, with thick shrubs ready grown and trees enveloped in masses of ivy — perfect fastnesses for nesting. Mature consideration showed that the plan was impracticable. For a great portion of the year such an enclosure would be dank and miserable, and the fall of a tree might do untold damage. I therefore fell back upon a less ambitious plan ; but one which alread3r gives much pleasure to myself, and, apparently, to the birds (which have been but a fortnight in it), and promises, in the end, to be both successful and ornamental. I was making a number of large pheasantries for foreign Pheasants in a lofty paddock. This paddock slopes rapidly from East to West, on both of which sides it is protected by thick woods ; on the North it is also protected, by a fine row of old beeches ; on the South it is entirety open. Between two large pheasantries I got in such an ordinary aviary as I have described, running North and South. At right angles to it, so that instead of opening into space the door of the flight should open out into this larger enclosure, is “ The Paradise.” It is 64 feet long sloping rapidly length-wise, and 24 feet wide. The height of the sides is 7 feet, that of the central span between 13 and 14 feet. It is entirety covered with 1 inch mesh strong netting, which is carried a foot into the ground, and on the North side is partially boarded. There was some contrivance to make its span at once perfectly strong and light to look at. The central ridge is supported by }^oung felled oaks, up which, already, ivy and Virginian creeper are growing Half-way between the side-posts and the central ridge it was necessary to have strong uprights : these are yews and spruce-firs cut down in my own grounds, with many small side boughs left for perches ; creepers have been planted to grow up them. Along the whole length of the North 157 side, save where it is broken by the aviary at right angles in the centre, a Thuja hedge is planted in the pheasantries next to it, which, in time, will be a great protection. Along the whole South side, and here within the wire, is planted a privet hedge (: Ligustrum ovalifolium ) which turns the corners at both ends. Various other bowers-to-be are planted, and some quite big shrubs are doing well. Towards the two ends, East and West, are limes destined to be cut into arcades as one sees them on the shores of Swiss and Italian Takes. Creepers have not been forgotten. Travellers in Japan record that we hardly know what wistarias are till we have sat under them in Japanese tea gardens. Wistarias are planted to grow up the side posts and, it is hoped, one day to meet over head. But I am making too long a story of what, after all, is only a modest aviary containing about 16,000 cubic feet. Within eight days of the Doves having been turned into it, there were several nests, some of them made by birds which, poor things ! have never before been able to nest. There is, too, very little squabbling, simply because those who don’t like each other can keep apart. There are a couple of coops with small Pheasants within it, which neither interfere nor are interfered with. I should add that, on all sides, there is a second line of defence, i.e., other enclosures, which add to the safety of “ The Paradise.” It is conspicuous from the windows of the old “folly” — of the last century; probably late in the twentieth century, if some of its trees survive, it too will be called “the folly” of a strange aviculturist of the nineteenth century. THE GOLDEN-SHOULDERED PARRAKEET. ( Psephotus chry sop tery giris J. By Reginald Phillipps. Those of our members who are interested in Parrakeets may remember that, in July, 1898, f see vol. i v.,/>. 155J I mentioned having shut up a female of this species with a young male Redrump. Tater in the year, having disposed of those Parrakeets which would have persecuted these birds, I loosed them in the birdroom with garden attachment. I had failed to obtain a male Golden-shoulder ; but the female and the Redrump became inseparable friends. In the spring of this year I noticed, day after day, feathers 158 of the Golden-shoulder lying about, and supposed that she had commenced to moult ; and she was looking very ragged and untidy. On two occasions, however, I picked up a very substan¬ tial “ mouthful ” of her blue lower-back feathers, and not till then did it dawn upon me that the feathers I had noticed lying about had probably been pulled out by the Redrump in his endeavours to stop her and bring her to reason. The two birds, moreover, were very adtive prospecting all over the place, and more than once seemed inclined to settle down in some nesting spot, but w’ere invariably ousted by an old Musky Rorikeet, who, “ paired ” with a Golden-fronted Parrakeet ( Bivtogerys tuipara J, was determined upon nesting, and in turns took possession of every box and log that I was able to supply, ruthlessly destroying every nest that came into his way ; and so it came about that I ceased to concern myself with the doings of the Golden- shoulder. On May 14th, I suddenly became awrare that the Golden- shoulder must be sitting, and found she had a nest in the bird- room, close by the door ; and, feeling in the log, I found it contained four eggs. As there were other birds in the bird-room I was obliged to go in occasionally ; but she sat so timidly that she invariably dashed out of the room the instant I touched the handle of the door. Otherwise she sat well, never coming off the nest but for the shortest possible time. While sitting, I think she was never fed on the nest by the male Redrump. The Redrump, nevertheless, could not have been more watchful and attentive. By word of mouth, he let her know everything that was going on in the outside world. They had a by no means meagre vocabulary, and, although of different species, under¬ stood one another perfectly. Should anyone appear, instantly a few very high-pitched piercing notes were sounded in rapid succession, almost as high pitched as the squeak of the bat which is inaudible to some ears. When that note had been uttered, the Golden-shoulder would lie like a log. Indeed, except when disturbed, I doubt if she ever left the nest until he came for her, and called her off with a few shrill whistles followed by pretty warbling notes, which she usually obeyed at once. He would then instantly feed her ; and she would quickly rush off for a nibble at the green grass or something, and dart away back to her nest accompanied by her warbling mate. On not less than two occasions, the Musky Rorikeet invaded the nest. The Redrump made no offer of assistance ; but the Golden-shoulder, from the interior of her log, growled 159 so fiercely and ominously that the Rorikeet thought better of it and withdrew. But their hopes and mine were doomed to disappointment, for the four eggs were clear. Whether this was the fault of the individual Redrump, an aviary -bred specimen I am told, which never seemed to have half the life and energy of my former Redrumps and has not grown a full-length tail to this day, or whether the sterility was owing to the birds being of different species, I am not able to say. It does seem a pity that a male Golden-shoulder should be unobtainable. The eggs are small, of a stout oval in shape, of precisely the same length as those of the Peach-faced Rovebird but thicker. A few preliminary attempts at a second nest were made, but without results ; and both birds soon afterwards fell into moult. NESTING OF THE SCOPS OWL ( Scops giu.) By E. G. B. Meade- Waldo. Two pairs of this delightful and grotesque little Owl have nested and successfully hatched and reared all their young ones in our aviaries this summer. The Owl family have always held the first place in our affedtions amongst the birds kept here, both as aviary inmates, and as wild inhabitants of our woods and farms. The Scops Owl, a very occasional straggler to these islands, is a regular summer visitor to Southern Europe, and is almost or entirely an insedt eater. I have always found them very difficult to start in confine¬ ment, as they require a most astonishing supply of insedts and other tender food. However, they seem to get hardier after a time, and, provided they have sufficient suitable food, have thriven. They become delightfully tame. For the last two years we have had a pair flying loose in a conservatory attached to the house, who, when a door was opened, used to come into the hall, perching on the pidtures and the tops of the doors ; and who would come down to be fed, and allow themselves to be picked up, without showing the slightest fear. The sight of a stranger will, however, transform them at once into what appears to be a broken-off piece of decayed wood with rough bark on it. This is done by quickly but almost imperceptibly i6o drawing all their feathers tight to the body, standing very upright, drawing the shoulder of the wing next to the supposed enemy half across the breast, elevating the ear tufts, and almost shutting the eyes. The protection of this manoeuvre is most complete. It is done by all the Owls, but in the Scops family it appears to arrive at its most perfect development. The first pair of Scops that nested with us this summer chose a good sized and solidly-made box with a lid in which a certain amount of decayed wood was placed ; they had a roomy aviar}^ to themselves. The cock commenced to call almost continuously from the middle of April, and the first egg was laid the 1 2th of May. The hen commenced to sit on May 17th, when she had completed her clutch of three eggs: differing from the generality of Owls, who usually commence incubation with the laying of the first egg. The young were hatched on June 10th, so incubation lasted twenty-four days, the shortest period of any Owl. They were covered with white down, grew most rapidly, and left the nest strong perchers on July 1st, and were apparently larger than their parents, but with short tails and wings, though able to fly several yards. They are now, July 10th, strong on the wing. The hen alone sat, and was carefully attended by the cock, who also did the whole work of providing food for the 3^oung until they left the nest, the hen staying with them and tearing it up. The food consisted of Cock-chaffers, May-flies, Alder and Caddis-flies, all of which were, fortunately, abundant at the right time, also Cockroaches and Mealworms, with young Sparrows and Mice ; the amount of food this little family would consume was something astonishing, on one occasion when nearly ready to leave the nest they cleared up twenty-five Short¬ tailed field voles in one day — besides many insects. The second pair went to nest ten days later, and have behaved precisely as the first pair, except that the cock has usually roosted with the hen in the nest. This pair have not got an aviary to themselves, but have for companions a Siberian Jay, a Spanish Azure- winged Pie, and a pair of Black-breasted Sandgrouse. The white down in the nestling is replaced by a plumage almost precisely resembling that of the adults, so they differ from all the Owls, except the Barn Owls, in having no inter¬ mediate down on the body between the casting of white down and the assumption of the full plumage. i6r A YELLOW-FRONTED AMAZON By A. G. Butler, Ph.D. The Hon. and Rev. F. G. Dutton has expressed a wish to hear of the experience of other members of the Society touch¬ ing Amazon Parrots. About 1893 an aunt of mine, who was moving, asked me if I should like to have her old Amazon Parrot: the bird had been twenty years in her possession and had previously been the pet of two other owners, though for how long she could not ascertain. As I understood that it was a good talker I gladly accepted it, and it remained in my possession until its death in February, 1898 : it is quite likely that this parrot was from forty to fifty years old when it died. Mr. Abrahams, who saw our Amazon soon after it was given to us, unhesitatingly declared it to be a hen (I believe chiefly on account of the pale colour of its eyes) and dissection after its death proved conclusively that he was correct. The bird was a Yellow-fronted Amazon ; and, so far from being unable to talk, it had entirely forgotten its own language ; so that when enraged (as it was off and on every day of its life) it shouted at the top of its voice exactly like a naughty boy : indeed on one occasion a visitor to our house imagined that a drunken man must have got into the kitchen, where the bird was kept. Dike most birds, and especially Amazons, Polly was intensely jealous and exceedingly treacherous : even our servant, who used to walk about with the bird on her shoulder and who could do almost what she pleased with it, got bitten once or twice. It liked me very well and soon learned to call me Arthur, but my wife was no favourite aud my son it detested, which did not surprise me, since he always teased it for the fun of hearing it shout and sob. As Mr. Dutton says of the Blue-fronted Amazon, our bird often had conversations with itself, the questions being almost all unintelligible and the answers invariably ‘ No ! ’ spoken very decidedly. It undoubtedly knew when to say certain things and only said them at the proper time : for instance if it saw any of us dressed to go out it would say — ‘ Are you going out ? > ‘ Are you going in the Park ? ’ and as you left the room it said ‘ Good-bye ’ or ‘ Good-dight ’ always saying the first in the morn¬ ing and the second in the evening. Perhaps the greatest proof of the reasoning power of these birds was that when my servant w7ent upstairs leaving Polly 162 alone, she soon got tired of her own company^ and began to call ‘ Addie ’ (she usually pronounced n like d) and when no notice was taken she tried to bring her down by an admirable imitation of the shout — ‘ Ba-ker ! ’ It was very funny 1o see the knowing way in which our bird cocked its head on one side when asking a question — ‘ Quite well ? ’ ‘ Got a headache ? ’ and, when she was answered, she always said — ‘ Oh ! ’ and sometimes — ‘ Quite right.’ Some years before this Amazon was given to me, a child was staying with my aunt, whose nurse was an Ayah, named Nana : the child used to call out its nurse’s name, and the parrot, not being able to say Nana learned to shout Lala at the top of its voice. As an evidence of how sounds having no meaning in themselves may be misinterpreted by those anxious to make sense of them, it is significant that at least two of our neighbours insisted that they had repeatedly heard our bird call out ‘ Mother ! ’—a word which it never spoke and perhaps had never heard. PERIOD OF MOULTING AND ASSUMPTION OF BREEDING PLUMAGE of the COMMON AVADAVAT. f SporcEginthus amandava) . By W. T. Page, F.Z.S. The birds (r cock and 2 hens) are kept all the year round in a garden aviary, the front of which is always open to the weather. 1896. Moult commenced December 4th, completed Jan. 3rd, 1897. I11 full color, June 6th, 1897. 1897. Moult commenced December iotli, completed December 30th. In full color, June 30th, 1898. 1898. Moult commenced December 5th, completed January 14th, 1S99. In full color, June 20th, 1899. The above data refer only to one and the same bird — as aforementioned I have only one cock ; when out of color he resembles the hens, with the exception that the red rump is more intense and there are several small black fan-shaped spots on his breast. The assumption of breeding plumage is brought about by a growth of color in the feathers, though one or two of the larger flights are moulted at this time — I cannot say how many as I did not catch him — it would have disturbed his nesting companions too much. The hens moulted concurrently with the cock, the moult in their case being a little more protracted. The hens sing, though their song is neither so sustained nor so varied as that of the males. It would be interesting if those who keep the Avadavat indoors would publish their data — as these birds in a state of nature moult somewhere about February or March, whereas mine have moulted regularly in December, it would appear as if this variation had been brought about by climatic conditions ; though one would have looked for the opposite : i.e.. Summer or early Autumn for the moult instead of December. I attribute my success in moulting them out of doors in the Winter, to their so readily eating the soft food and mealworms. I use Abraham’s, Arthur’s and Maschke’s soft food alternately, with a liberal addition of ants cocoons. CORRESPONDENCE. BIRDS OF KUMASI, WEST AFRICA. Sir, — I send 37ou a few notes in the hope they maj^ be of interest. When I was in Kumasi in May, of last year, I made the acquaintance of an old chief, who ruled an outlying district, and by dint of much explanation, I got him to understand that I was interested in birds, and he promised to send me some. He first sent me a very large Hornbill, which was a great pet for some weeks till a young Blotched Genet, that used to run about 1113’ hut, one day made an end of him. He had an extraordinary trick of swallowing a large bead I had on my table, and then when I held out my hand he would return it in such a solemn fashion that all my visitors used to be vastb’ amused. That he really swallowed it I know, for I could feel it in his crop. Shortly after, a part37 came in from my friend the chief, bringing a couple of Touracos : they were the Thick-billed Touraco and were exactly the same as the Senegal Touraco in colouring, but were a trifle larger, and had yellow beaks instead of red. Well, one died but the other did well and is still alive : he survived a journey in a cold room up the channel in Februar3^ of this year, so must be pretty tough. I gave him to Mr. Housden and hope he will like him. This bird is commonly called the ‘ Clock bird’ on the Coast, from his habit of going off like an alarum clock at dawn ; mine always did it when I was at Cape Coast Castle, and always preceded his gruff note of ‘ hough-hough-hough ’ ad lib. with a shrill ‘ kik.’ The power of swallowing is enormous for the size of the bird, half of a large banana slips down his gullet with the greatest ease. Mine was a most cleanly bird, and so tame that he alwa37s tried to get into 1113' tub in the morning as soon as I poured it out, even if I was in it myself: I might add he was nearty alwa37s loose. I11 the wild state the37 are ven7 SI137 birds indeed, and although when on column I have heard their cn7 sometimes twenty or thirty times in the morning, I onljr twice saw tlie bird, but then a green bird in a thick green tree is never a conspicuous object. Nearly all the huge cotton trees in the Sacrifice Grove at Kumasi were destroyed by our troops in the 1895 Expedition, but one monster was left among other smaller ones. In a hole about 40 feet up a pair of Grey Parrots were nesting in February, 1898. I went up by means of a bamboo- ladder, and found three white eggs about the size of a Woodpigeon’s. In about a month the young ones were old enough to come to the mouth of the hole and look out, when I took them. One died, but two I still have: they are very tame, sham death, and do lots of ridiculous tricks and also are beginning to talk fairly well. I found the Sierra Leone Grey Parrot to be a much darker and uglier bird than the Gold Coast kind, perhaps it is P. timneh, please inform me Mr. Editor. I will send you a few further notes, if they will be of any interest, on the birds of Sierra Leone. Boyd Horsbrugh, Lieut. A rmy Service Corps. PYTELIA MELBA AND PYTEL1A AFRA. Sir,— I should be glad if some expert of the Avicultural Society would explain the differences between Pytelia melba and Pytelia afra. There seems to be some confusion between the two species, both of which are described as the Red-faced Finch. At the end of March last year I received a splendid pair of Red-faced Finches, and a week later a second pair from the same source. This second pair I took to be an immature pair of the same species as the first pair. The horizontal white lines on the breast were not nearly so pronounced, and the red on the face of the male was only represented by a few small spots. But as no change took place in these birds after several months’ possession, be}’ond perhaps a few more red spots on the male’s face, I began to regard them as something distinfit from the first pair. One very marked difference exists in the colour of the feathers under the tail. In the first pair these are quite white, but in the second pair the white is crossed bv dark bars. On referring to the illustration of Pytelia afra in Dr. Butler’s work on 1 Foreign Finches,’ I find these dark bars are represented. I have therefore formed the opinion that the second pair are Pytelia afra , and the first pair Pytelia melba. The two Pytelia melba and the hen Pytelia afra were exhibited at the Crystal Palace, in October, 189S. The report in the Avicultural Magazine referred to all three birds as Pytelia afra. Another periodical called the cock Melba a Wiener’s Waxbill. Acting on this information I entered the cock Melba at the Alexandra Palace in November, 1S98, as a Wiener’s Waxbill. The same paper then stated that it was incorrectly entered. At the Crystal Palace Show in February, 1S99, the cock Pytelia melba was exhibited alone, and the pair of Pytelia afra together. In this case the report in the Avicultural Magazine expressed a doubt as to whether the two exhibits were really two species as entered. I11 the Feathe?-ed World , of June 23rd, both pairs are spoken of as Pytelia melba. The hen Melba died at the Roj-al Aquarium Show in November, 189S, and the cock Afra came home dead from the Crystal Palace Show in February, 1899, but both birds are preserved and mounted for future reference. The cock Melba and the hen Afra are still alive and in the best of health and feather. It has been said that it was a pity that a hen was not shown with the cock Melba at the Crystal Palace Show in October, instead of separately. It would have been a far greater pity if it had been, or except in the case of the Shama I have never known a hen to be so ill-treated by its mate. When first received they were the best of friends, and so remained for nearly two months, when one morning the hen was found with several feathers missing, and the head bleeding, in a corner of the cage. Each bird was then kept in a separate cage, and about eyery two weeks an attempt was made to put them together, but the persecution always recommenced immediately. This state of things continued till the death of the hen in November. The pair of Pytelia afra on the contrary always remained together in perfect friendship, and three white eggs were laid on the floor of the cage, with an interval of about a week between each. The first egg was placed in a nest suspended in the cage, but the other eggs were laid on the floor as before. The three eggs were kept in the nest for a long time, but the birds took no further notice of them. If they had returned in safety from the Crystal Palace they would have been allowed to try again in an aviary, but unfortunately only the hen returned alive. All attempts to mate the hen Afra with the cock Melba have proved most unsuccessful. E. W. Hawkins. BEARDED TITS. Sir, — In the last number of the Magazine Mr. Phillipps writes of a pair of Bearded Tits in his aviary as “inveterate egg stealers.’’ It is much to be hoped that the pair he kept were exceptions to the rule in regard to behaviour. I have not kept these interesting birds till this season, but now have a pair in a small aviary, which is built over a ditch, and in which my Kingfisher “Johnnie” lived four years; though it is an ideal place for Bearded Tits they have made no attempt at nesting, but in the same place are a pair of Goldfinches, which have successfully nested, also a cock Serin Finch mated with a hen Lesser Redpoll — these have also nested — and though I have seen the Bearded Tits daily within a few inches of each nest no egg has been disturbed. The hen Redpoll laid five eggs, but only two were fertile: one young one died, the other is a fine bird now flying about, and the hen Redpoll is again sitting on five eggs. I am not sure if this cross has been previously recorded, but I fancy they should be pretty little hybrids. It seems a pity the American Goldfinch or Siskin ( C . tristis) should be so difficult to keep. I have had several but they all seem to go off in a few months; many dozens W’ere imported in Londou this spring and I should imagine not a tenth part are now alive. If we could only get some bred here they might be hardier. I am afraid the very changeable weather we have had this summer will have made it a bad season for the breeding of British birds in aviaries. G. C. Swaipbs. THE NESTING OE THE NONPAREIL. Sir, — I am sending the Magazine another account of nesting, which, I think, will be interesting to all our readers, namely that of the American Nonpareil. The bird itself, at least the male, is well-known to all, as the bird i66 dealers always have a large stock about June; the females are very rare and probably few of our Members have ever seen a genuine live one. I was fortunate enough to secure three hens last autumn, and I was able to winter them all right ; and this spring I turned them out in two of my big outdoor aviaries, one pair in each. The reason for this is that Nonpareil cocks are so abominably combative that if two were put together one would soon have to yield up the ghost. As it was, for some days, the two cocks spent most of the day trying to get at each other through the dividing wires of their aviaries. I saw once that someone asked if Nonpareils changed colour. They do, most undoubtedly ; in winter the cock is quite a sober looking gentle¬ man, and only gets his splendid livery as summer draws on. Another thing — they take about three years before they come into full colour, (b) The hen Nonpareil is a very sober little lady ; a sort of olive green on top and very pale buff below. She has not the slightest suspicion of blue about her, and if she has (though it sounds a bit Irish) she is an undoubted young cock. Nearly all the so-called hens are young cocks. I once looked carefully through about sixty so called hens one by one, and out of the whole lot, only two were genuine hens. I suspeft that very few people keep Nonpareils for any length of time, as they are, like our own Chaffinch, more than half insectivorous, and a seed diet soon leads to wasting away or consumption. The cock has a pretty little song and he is very fond of sitting on the top of a bush and giving out his performance. I often hear mine singing quite late at night when it is almost dark. My birds built their nest in a box tree, quite low down, and it was a very pretty affair, made externally of fine hay and grass and lined inside with fine roots and horsehair. The hen laid three eggs and sat splendidly, she did not seem to mind my looking at her one bit. The eggs are sea green in colour and heavily blotched with sienna brown on the big end. They are in fact somewhat like a small Dhyal’s egg. Two young were hatched and one egg was clear and I have it now. At first the young were covered with very dark fluff, like young Bullfinches. So far as I could see the hen did most of the feeding, at any rate the cock did not let me see him stoop to domestic duties, though I dare say he did some. Whenever I went in to feed he perched himself on a high twig, as if to say : “ Now what are you up to ? ” The hen soon got to know that my visits meant food for the babies, and she was always ready for me after a few days. When the young are being fed their call-note is something like si, si, si. The excreta are carried out to a distance and dropped. The young grew grandly and at the end of about thirteen days left the nest, July 7th. The}' are funny little grey birds with black beaks and stumpy little tails. I saw them yesterday, July 22nd, and the tails were more presentable, and they fly very decently, and very proud do the parents seem of them. (6). I have had a good many of these birds, but my males never put on a different plumage for the winter ; moreover, the numbers exhibited at our Shows are always recognizable as typical, whether exhibited in winter or summer. I have had two hens, one of which is still living. I purchased her some four or five years ago in nestling plum¬ age.— A. G. B. 167 The young were reared entirely on insect food ; and only those who have tried, know what that means. I believe that this is the first time that Nonpareils have ever been bred and reared in England and therefore my pair are justly proud of their effort. C. D. Farrar. THE AMERICAN MOCKING BIRD. Sir, — I should like to ask you or any member of the Avicultural Society whether the above bird, Turdus polyglottus (Wilson), is the wonderful mimic he is made_©nt to be in books. I have had one for twelve months, and he is in good health and song (he is singing now) and his song much resembles the chirping of a good- sized chicken. As for his mimicry, I don’t detect him mimicking either human being, animal, or bird, although dogs, cats, ten different kinds of birds, children, etc., abound. Now I have heard this power of mimicry questioned by others, though, in a book I have just read, a writer states that he has heard the bird mimic 24 different sounds of beasts and birds. I should, therefore, be very glad if any English aviculturists will state what their experience is of the bird’s vocal abilities, (a) A. Jones. THE AGE OF CAGE-BIRDS. Sir, — In the March number, Mr. Meade-Waldo has an article on the ages to which birds live in confinement, and he hoped the members would be induced to record any that seemed to be sufficiently important. I have kept account of dates of purchase of the smallest Finches and Waxbills, and when death ensued, and in the majority of cases about eight years seems to be the length of duration of their lives in confinement when kept in cages. Here are a few cases. On the nth June, 1889, I bought three birds — a hen Green Avadavat and a pair of African Grey Waxbills. The former lived to 27th March, 1897 — within three months of eight years. The pair of Waxbills died in the same year : the cock on the 31st May, and the lien on the 20th July — one just under, the other a little over, the above-mentioned time. O11 the 8th November, 1889, a pair of Orange-cheek Waxbills arrived ; the cock lived until the 17th January, and the hen until the 20th February, 189S. These dates were a little over the usual period. I can ‘ go one better ’ than our Secretary with regard to his pair of Golden-breasted Waxbills, that he has had about seven years {vide April number, page 112). A pair was sent me 011 the 12th of June, 1890; the cock getting through the f-inch bars of the cage, was killed the same year bj* a cat ; but the hen is still in good health. As Mr. Goddard wrote that they had moulted with him the previous autumn, she must have been in this country for ten years. The above are cage records with regard to duration of life in confine¬ ment. Do any of our members keep their wee birds longer in outdoor or indoor aviaries? If so, will some of them kindly give the average age of their feathered friends. W. T. CaTreugh. (a). I gave a detailed account of my American Mocking-bird in the Feathered World for April 5th, 1895, and I have again described it much more fully in my Articles on Foreign Bird-keeping (F. W. 1898, chapter IV). This bird is a superb singer and mimic: possibly Mr. Jones may possess a hen. — A. G. B. Princess of Wales’ Parrakeet f Poly tel is alexandrine J „ From Living Specimens in the possession of Mr. H. J. Fulljames. l/Emt ern.Br os . Clir omo ■ THE Bvicultural ^agasine, BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY. VOL. V. — NO. 59. All rights reserved. SEPTEMBER, 1899. THE PRINCESS OF WALES’S PARRAKEET. By Henry J. Fulejames. In writing of the Princess of Wales’s Parrakeet ( Polytelis alexandnz) only superlative adjectives can be used. Of all the Parrakeets it is the rarest, the most elegant in shape, the most beautiful and at the same time the most delicate in colouring, the tamest, the most desirable as a pet, and the least objection¬ able in “ song.” I had almost written that it was absolutely without objection in regard to the screaming which is such a drawback to the keeping of Parrots ; but when it likes, the Princess of Wales’s Parrakeet has a very shrill whistle which is somewhat trying to the human ear. This, fortunately, is only resorted to occasionally, and then only when it is protesting against attentions being bestowed upon other inmates of the bird-room. There is one other superlative adjective which, unhappily, must be applied to the bird — it is most delicate in constitution. Possibly in the remote wilds of the extreme interior of Australia, whence the bird comes, it finds some food which cannot be imitated in captivity, or possibly the very few specimens of which I, or any one else for that matter, have had any knowledge, have been extra delicate representatives of the species. Only one specimen has ever been acquired at the Zoo, and that was “deposited” in 1895 (cC). On my last visit to the Gardens, the bird was alive, but was sadly “ out of form.” Of my own two specimens, the cock did not survive importation very long ; and the hen has required considerable attention ever since I have had her. Many times her life has not seemed worth a day’s purchase. For a long time she refused seed altogether, and was kept alive entirely on fruit and sponge-cake, with port wine and (a) I distinctly remember seeing' two specimens of Polytelis alexandree at the Zoo a few years ago : one was, I believe, the property of the Society, and the other was deposited. I). S.-S. 169 beaten egg in the place of water for drinking. She is now in a healthy moult, and is living on a mixture of millet and canary seed. The extreme rarity of the bird seems to be due to the difficulty of getting it through the journey of a thousand and odd miles to the coast, across a country devoid of roads. With my two birds were brought down two others, a pair, and these were “deposited” in the Adelaide Zoo by the gentleman, an Australian explorer, who had brought them from the interior. Of this pair the cock bird, like my own, has since died, but fortunately not before a pair of young ones had been hatched, and I believe these are now doing well in the Gardens. If they are for sale upon the return visit to Australia of the friend who gives me the information, they will be bought for me, so I may yet have another pair. In view of the admirable drawing by Mr. Smit, a repro¬ duction of which appears in this number, it is quite unnecessary for me to describe the plumage of this beautiful bird, especially as, although even a painting must fail to do justice to the delicate gradations of colour to be found in the living specimen, a written description would, to a still greater extent, fall short of adequately expressing those wonderful combinations of rose- , colour, grey, green, and blue. THE BLACK LARK. Melanocorypha yeltoniensis. By Reginald Phillipps. Except in the London Zoological Gardens, I have never seen or heard of this species being kept in confinement ; and in my limited library, the only accounts of it that I can find are in the Royal Natural History and in the Catalogue of Birds, British Museum, Vol. XIII. ; and I have kept only one pair. It must be borne in mind, therefore, that my observations have been based solely upon these two birds, living under unnatural conditions, and fed, while breeding, almost entirely upon mealworms. On the 19th February, 1898, I obtained a pair of Black Larks. They were so weak from having been fed only on seed that for a time I despaired of saving the male. As soon as they were strong enough, they were placed in the garden, where they have been from that time to this, — during the winter with the free run of the whole aviary, but during the rest of the year shut off in the reserved portion, which is so crowded with trees and 170 shrubs as seriously to interfere with their flight and general welfare. Happily there are some sheds nearly four feet, and a structure above seven feet, high, on the roofs of which they pass a great deal of their time. And the female often used to sit on two thick perches fully eight feet from the ground, one on either side of the aviary, and would sometimes spend a good half-hour flying backwards and forwards from one to the other. Our Sky Lark, be it remembered, in some parts of the country freely perches on stone walls. It was not to be expected that such exceptionally timid and nervous birds, and withal so weak, should nest the first summer. A certain amount of flirting went on : during some months the male was perpetualty trotting about, warbling almost unceasingly, with his tail cocked up in the air. This spring, however, I considered they might nest ; the reserved aviary had a number of little finches in it, but every bird was removed that was likely to interfere with them. Unfortunately, I was obliged to make one exception, for the Pied Rock-Thrushes, male and female, became so quarrelsome as they threw off their winter clothes and donned their nuptial robes (a little point in natural history which is ignored by theorists) that I had to locate the most forward pair in the Larks’ aviary. They did not interfere much with the female ; but almost every time the female Rock-Thrush came off her nest she went for the male Lark. In the open, the Lark would have made off, but in the aviary he hadn’t a chance ; for minutes at a time she would viciously pursue him ; and the poor creature so knocked himself about against the roof of the aviary that my hopes of his breeding fell very low indeed. Happily she became more quiet or otherwise occupied when her 3^oung were hatched ; and I cleared them out of the avia^ a few hours before the young Larks were supposed to be due to appear. Very early in the spring I had noticed that the female Lark had commenced to work out a hollow, at the extreme end of the aviar3% under the stem of a Virginia creeper. I may here mention that, when at work, the female (for the lazy male, imitating his masters, was above work ; but he was not above seeing his wife work) seemed never to use her feet ; she invariably worked with her bill, moving it masterfully, right and. left; but when taking a dust bath she would scratch like a common fowl. On May 21st, the female commenced carrying mouthfuls of the shortest obtainable ha3^ in the direction of the nest ; on the 25th she was still busy, and still carried a little on the 26th. party in the winter I had thickly covered the roof of the “structure” alread3' referred to with hay. so that the Larks might not sit on the zinc ; and, curiously enough, both this bird (for her first nest) and the Rock-Thrush used only this soiled hay for their respective nests. Watching from a window of the house, I was able to see her fly down with this hay, but nothing more. It transpired afterwards that six eggs were laid ; and she seems to have commenced sitting with the first ; and the first¬ born of the four was perhaps six days older than the youngest. The female Lark sat very timidly, instantly leaving the nest (first running some yards, then flying) if the handle of the house-door, which opened into the adjoining aviary, were but touched. There was one curious difference between this species and the Rock-Thrush. The male Rock-Thrush, with a meal¬ worm in his bill, would sit like a lump for any length of time if he could detect the slightest sign of my presence at any of the windows, and it was weary work watching him ; but the Lark seldom, if ever, although so wary, detected me through the glass. On June 15th, creeping on all-fours beneath the thick foliage, I paid my first visit to the nest. It was not where I had supposed. The thickening foliage had driven the Lark away to the most open (overhead) spot she could find at the back of the garden. Observing the nest-hole under the wall to have been deserted, for a moment I was nonplused, when I suddenly found the young under my nose. I counted them carefully, only three heads were visible, and these three heads with their three corresponding bodies were thickly coated with exceptionally long down of a light yellow, or yellow-buff, colour. Now that I knew where to look for the nest, I found I could get a distant peep at it from the feeding-place ; and as the lump of yellow down swelled above the level of the ground, when attending to the food and water, I could daily form an idea as to how matters were progressing. On June 22nd, the female commenced building another nest. On the first day she carried only lumps of earth : — If I ever had any doubts as to the power of a bird to cany its eggs or anything else, they were dispelled by the sight of the ease with which this bird carried really large lumps ot earth to her nest. After depositing each lump in the nest-hole, which presumably had been excavated before I was up, she proceeded to work at it with her chest, moving her body right and left. Disgusted with the thick foliage, this second nest was built in the front of the aviary, and could be watched from the house. To return to the young birds : — On June 23rd, the nest was chock full, the first-born sprawling as usual over the others ; but on the following day there remained but one lialf-fledged 172 creature, looking the picture of misery. Later in the day I saw two youngsters hopping (they could not walk until some days later) after their mother, and by accident they found the new nest and instantly flopped into it, and made it their head-quarters for some two hours, floundering about, and hopelessly marring their mother’s schemes of concealment. Afterwards they hopped about all over the place, rushing to their mother for food ; and later I observed a third. But the mother repaired and took to her nest ; and on the evening of the 25th the three young looked neglected and very miserable. On the 26th, the piteous cry of one of the young birds, No. 3 in order of age, nearly broke my heart it had been entirely deserted. I made a search, and found the dead body of a No. 4, evidently the one I had seen alone in the nest. It was now lying about two feet from the nest, or perhaps a little more, and probably had been carried to the place where I had found it, and then had been deserted as too young to follow for food. No. 3 I took into the house, but did not succeed in rearing it. The sitting mother came off her nest from time to time to feed Nos. 1 and 2, who settled themselves down in the neighbourhood of the uest, and darted after her the instant she came off. Eventually No. 2 died a few hours after a thunderstorm, apparently from inflammation, and No. 1 alone survives, The only peculiarity about the nests was their depth, and steep coffee-cup sides. According to the Royal Natural History, “ the female lays four eggs, bluish in colour and spotted with yellow.” I11 the first nest, there were four young birds ; and I found two eggs, one near the place to which the female carried the excreta, and the other in the same direction but not carried so far. I am reasonably satisfied that these eggs had been laid in the nest, and had been removed by the female. Only two eggs were laid in the second nest ; but I picked up a third on the 13th July, in the spot whither the female often retreated when disurbed. At a very early stage of the second nest I had noticed the prema¬ ture rejection of the male by the female, which was followed by the sudden desertion of the nest ; this splendid bird had taken a chill, and, to my great sorrow, died during the night of July 1 2th- 1 3th. I cannot make my eggs agree with the description mentioned above. The ground is a pale gray-white ; and they are blotched all over with pale or gray-brown. At the thick end, the “ spots” run more into one another than over the rest of the 173 egg. Some of the eggs have darker and more decidedly brown spots than the others. The female did all the work of nest-making, incubating, and feeding and attending upon the young. More than once the male savagely attacked the young birds; and I cannot place to his credit a single certain instance of his having fed them. During the whole of the spring and nesting-season, he had been my great delight ; and I am grievously disappointed that he should have turned out to be such a selfish character. From early morn till late in the evening he used to sing and posture incessantly : it was one continuous, never-ending warble. The song was neither powerful nor beautiful, but it was very varied and highly pleasing. So long as the growth of grass and wheat was sufficiently short to allow him to keep to the ground, he was perpetually on the trot with a cocked-up tail. Should he chance to meet his mate, he instantly commenced to dance and caper. He had a true love dance ; and with high arched neck would prance and skip right merrily. Before the eggs were hatched, however, he was driven off the ground, and thenceforth spent most of his time on the roof of a shed, slightly under four feet high and overlooking the second nest. Here he went on with his warbling, the tail jerking up and down with the stiffness of a wooden toy, and here also he would dance if joined by the female even for a moment. For a while I could not understand some of their courting postures, until I found that they copulated in the air. Perhaps this is not uncommon with Larks, but I do not know. It came as a surprise to me. When the female was not very amiable, he would charge at her again and again until he forced her into flight. When she became more affectionate, however, it was a pretty sight to watch them. Standing up at his full height, some two feet from her, with wings and tail spread out to their full extent, with quivering, shimmering wings he would slowly approach her. If very loveable, she would rise and meet him likewise with outspread wings. The male Black Lark evidently glories in his black, as the courting Golden¬ winged Woodpecker glories in his golden, underparts, for not only did he disport himself as described when actually with the female on the shed, but, from the nearest edge of the shed, he would stand over her, as it were, with outstretched quivering wings, while she was sitting on her second nest. So long as the Rock-Thrushes were in the aviary, the male clearly understood that he had a duty to perform, and regularly patrolled in the front, charging furiously at every bird that came to the ground, including the male Rock-Thrush. When the 174 female Rock-Thrush came to the ground, he would crouch down, keeping his head always towards her, and would execute various strategical movements to the rear until he was able to manoeuvre himself altogether out of her neighbourhood. From the moment that he realised that the Rock-Thrushes had really gone, he ceased to keep guard, feeling that there was no longer a foe worthy of his steel. Thenceforward, and up to the actual day on which the female died, he gave himself up to warbling and posturing ; but, since, he has been mute, and keeps almost entirely on the ground along with his child, with whom he is now quite friendly. As regards the plumage of these birds, the female may be briefly described as of a light sandy-buff much speckled with darker. The male, in winter plumage, is nominally like the female ; but my male lias always shewn a much darker plumage, with appareutty black primaries. His only moult is in the autumn. According to the Br. Museum Catalogue,— “ In winter plumage the male is black, but the whole of the feathers are obscured by broad edgings of sandy colour. By the wearing off of these margins the full black plumage is attained.” This is doubtless substantially correct; but I am not quite satisfied that it accounts for all the changes I have noticed. The same authority says of the young, which one might suppose would have been like the female, — “ Mottled like all young Barks, and especially resembling a Shore-Lark, but blackish on the head and back.’” My young birds had no juvenile mottling ; if they are to be described as mottled, so must the parents, especially the mother. Numbering them according to age, of No. 4 I can only saj^ that it was blackish and without mottles ; it was very juvenile, and the reverse of savory when picked up, and was promptly cremated. Of the three elder, as they trotted about, No. 1 was alwa}^s lighter than the others, while the other two were exactly alike. Presumably they were a female and two males. Nos. 2 and 3, when in a squatting position, seemed to be wholly black above, with a conspicuous sandy superciliary streak. On close examination, however, it appeared that most of the feathers had a faint edging round the tips of sandy ; whilst those round the neck, on the chest, and especially on the wings, were more or less edged with the same colour; but the lower breast, abdomen, and vent were of a dead sooty black without a trace of lighter. As No. 1 developed, the sandj^ tips seemed to grow and hide the black ; but she remains distinctly darker than the old female. At one period, a bold line of sandy ran up from the bill to about the 175 centre of the crown ; and this line, and the superciliary streaks, formed very conspicuous marks on the blackish ground. On July 15th, I found the young bird on one of the sheds for the first time, and, at a distance of about four feet, made the following notes : — The superciliary streaks, although still very conspicuous, seemed inclined to spread ; the central streak had dispersed, and formed a cluster of sandy spots on the crown ; a new sandy streak started on each side from the corner of the mouth, passed well below the eye, but curved upwards close behind it and almost joined the superciliary streak, giving the face a curious but not pretty expression ; the back of the head, nape, and cheeks were spotless and of a deep brown colour, almost black. Something like a circle of sandy still appeared round the neck. Back brown, each feather being edged with sandy ; shoulders similar, but strongly inclined to be spotty. Secondaries broadly edged with sandy ; primaries as folded, almost entirely brown, but a little lighter along the edge of the wing. Chest white sandy, spotted with darker. Tail brown, laterally edged with light sandy. I never noticed the latter on the mother during her life, but found afterwards that the whole of the outer feather on each side was very light sandy, and also the edge of the outer web of the second feather. I11 the young bird, this light edging down the sides of the tail is often con¬ spicuous as she runs about, but I do not notice it in the male. The tail was forked. Although still inclined to darker, the black has practically disappeared. Where has it gone to, and how came the young to be so very black? I have never studied colour feeding, but cannot refrain from suggesting that the unnatural feeding of these young birds may have caused an unusual flow of latent black pigment. The mealworms were stopped as soon as possible ; and the blackness in the survivor has subsided or been absorbed. I am inclined to think that the male obtains some of his colouring from a flow of pigment in the spring. On the other hand, as a protective colouring for the young, the black must be valuable ; for the three tots, as broad as they were long, when squatting about, looked remarkably like cattle droppings ; and when one would raise his head in the long grass, the thick bunch of sandy down on the eyebrows, not far off an inch long, gave the black urchin such a venomous-reptile and generally uncanny appearance as would hinder many a foe from approach¬ ing too near. As regards the survivor, she and her mother were devoted to one another ; and, as she frisked and skipped around her in youthful glee, I felt inclined to frisk and skip myself, and to 176 shout with the celebrated but otherwise unknown poet : — Oh, what a lyARK ! ! ! Habitat. — “ Central Asia, ranging into Southern Russia, and sometimes even further westward.” August 21st. — The young bird has since been quietly assuming the plumage of the adult female. THE NESTING OF THE PENNANT, By the Rev. C. D. Farrar. I am sometimes afraid that members of our Society will weary of my frequent signatures over articles sent in ; but I cannot help my birds doing so well ; so with this brief apology, I will begin again. I may perhaps be permitted, before commencing my story, to refer my readers back to a paper I wrote last }rear on the “ Sex of Pennants.” I then pointed out that there is no possibilit}' of mistaking a cock and hen Pennant. The cock has a crimson head extending right over the cheeks and neck ; the hen has her head of an orangy-reddish tint. But leaving out, for fear of wearying my readers, many other points to which I then drew attention — the absolutely certain way of telling a hen is by her tail. In the hen Pennant the centre feathers are gree?i ; in the cock they are rich violet. I refer to this point because Mr. Fillmer saw fit to put in, what I considered under the circumstances, a most (shall we call it ?) impolite footnote to my article : — “ We do not hold ourselves responsible for any of the opinions or facts stated in this article. The same applies to all articles published in this Magazine ; but we wish it to be clearly understood in this case, as our personal feeling is that Mr. Farrar’s conclusions require to be confirmed by the observation of other specimens, besides the pair he writes about, before they can be accepted. — Ed.” I said nothing at the time ( a ), but, thinks I, we will bide our time, and “all things come to him that waits.” These things have come to me. My Pennants have bred, and it is not the same hen I wrote about then, but a new one ; and she has, mirabile dictu, the same signs of sex as her predecessor ! So even Editors may live and learn. ( a ) This is scarcely correct — Mr. Farrar said a good deal, in correspondence with is. — Ed. 177 I should like here to say that the Editor may in future rest quite easy that I do not say what I cannot prove. Not only is the old hen Pennant marked as I say, but in the nest of young ones, of which there are five, two have green tail centres and three have blue : hence there are three cocks and two hens. If anyone will in future look at a lot of Pennants, they will see that it is as I say, and that it is quite easy to distinguish the Sex of Pennants. So much for my own defence — for even the worm will turn if you tread hard enough. I might say that if the British Museum Catalogue gives one description alone of the adult plumage, as Mr. Seth- Smith says, the sooner the authorities alter the description the better it will be for accuracy. They began nesting operations sometime in May : the cock diligently feeding the hen being the first sign of good things to come. When pairing, the cock makes a terrible noise, something like the barking of a dog, and he also gives a pretty whistle from time to time. If the hen is not ready to mate, should her lord prove too demonstrative, she runs at him along the perch, head down, and pretends to bite his leg savagely; when he sheers off quickly. One night, by the look of the hen, I knew eggs were not far off, and the next morning there was an egg laid on the floor, through inexperience. Thinks I, this will not do, my lady ; so I popped the egg into her log and awaited issues. Next day she took the hint and laid her egg, like a well-regulated bird, beside the other in the nest. Altogether, five were deposited ; but at first she did not sit very closely, and caused me thereby much mental anguish. However, she apparently knew her business better than I did, and what Pennants’ eggs required by way of heat — for every egg hatched out in due course : about twenty days, as far as I could guess, for it is impossible to tell such things to a day, unless you are idiot enough to interfere, and I am not. The first I knew of the hatching out, was the noise the youngsters made. Day by day it grew, to my great joy, and at first resembled the barking in miniature of a pack of hounds, but gradually the voices changed to the whistle of the adults, and then to a hoarse grumbling noise. Both parents worked early and late ; and well they might, to feed those five hungry mouths, and to their credit they have reared ever}' one. One curious thing I noticed, that, when the old cock was going to feed, when the youngsters were small, he used to put his beak down on the perch and bring up the food 173 repeatedly into his mouth, perhaps for five minutes at a time; and then off he would fly to the nest, as much as to say, “ I think the feeding bottle will do now.” The hen brooded her young closely for about four days ; afterwards she only stayed in the nest at night. Too hot I expect ! The young ones are all out. but are being fed by the parents. They have yellow beaks ; the hens onl}r a carmine crown on the top of their heads, followed by sage green ; backs sage green with dull black centres ; tails of hens tipped with white and green centres ; cocks’ tails blue where the hens’ are green. The young hens have much more green on the necks and sides than the young cocks. Size, when they first came out, about that of a big Rosella. They are now, August 21st, nearly as big as their parents. I have looked carefully through all books I know of, and, so far as I can see, this is the first authentic account of rearing Pennants. I paj^ no attention to vague general statements. I might say that my Pennants dote on mealworms, and eat them like shrimps, held in one claw. It may be nice for the Pennant, but I should think decidedly nastj^ for the mealworm. We have printed the above article exactly as received from the writer— and are quite content to leave the point at issue to the good sense of our readers. It is possible that Mr. Farrar has discovered a sexual distinction which escaped the notice of Gould, Salvadori, and other ornithologists, and which the many aviculturists who have kept Pennants for years have also failed to observe— but we do not consider that he has at present proved this. We shall keep an open mind on the point until Mr. Farrar’s conclusions are confirmed or disproved by other observers. If such a very marked difference in colouring in the sexes actually exists in all examples, it is passing strange that it has not been noticed before, and that the series of skins at the British Museum fails to shew it. We should be glad if members who keep Pennants, of which they know the sex, would carefully examine their plumage in the light of Mr. Farrar’s remarks and communicate the result to us for publication. — Ed. Everyone who has had any experience of the Pennant Parrakeet (either living in its native haunts, in captivity in Plurope, or dead in Museums) has unhesitatingly described the sexes as alike ; but Mr. Farrar, having apparently secured one or two females of the closely allied species Platycercus adelaidee, and paired them successfully with P. pen nanti, has felt it his duty to set everybody right. The Adelaide Broadtail is so closely related to Pennant’s Broadtail, that it would be quite remarkable if they refused to interbreed. When races interbreed, examples resembling each parent are quite likely to be reproduced by them. The young of typical Pennants are described as being entirely green. Breeding Pennants has been repeatedly done in Germany, but rearing the young has only been occasionally successful : nevertheless this has occurred. — A.G.B. REVIEW. “ Foreign Bird Keeping ,” by Arthur G. Butler , Ph.D., F.L.S., F.Z.S. . etc. Part I. (“ Feathered World ” Office). This is a reprint of a series of articles which have recently appeared in the Feathered World. T79 Readers of the Aviculiural Magazine do not require any introduction to Dr. Butler as an author, and in this unpre- tentious«book they will once more appreciate the accuracy and thoroughness by which his writings are always distinguished. After a chapter on “Aviaries and Management,” Dr. Butler gives an account, first of some of the more frequently imported soft-food species, and afterwards of the finches and finch-like birds. Only between 20 and 30 insectivorous species are treated of, but of the small seed-eaters a very much larger number are described. It will doubtless be read with interest by those who have not already perused it in the Feathered World , and it will be handy to beginners as a book of reference. We should have expected to find the important subject of food more fully discussed in a work of this kind. With regard to the feeding of soft-food birds, Dr. Butler’s views are well known, and are, of course, re-stated in “ Foreign Bird Keeping.” Dr. Butler’s method of treatment does not commend itself to the present writer. It appears to us that in several instances Dr. Butler generalises too much, and draws conclusions as to the character of a species from too limited experience — but this is the fault of all writers on aviculture, and one which it is almost impossible to avoid. There are numerous illustrations, some by the author and some by Mr. Lydon. CORRESPONDENCE. THE SPOTTED PANTHER-BIRD. Sir, — I wonder if any of our members know whether the Spotted Pardalote (Pardalotus punctatus) (Gonld) or its congener, the Allied Pardalote (P. affinis), have been imported and kept in confinement in this country. It seems to me that they might be kept quite as easily as many other birds which are now regularly offered for sale, and more beautiful creatures it would be difficult to imagine. In case the birds are not generally known, I enclose a drawing of the Spotted Pardalote made from specimens collected by myself in Australia. They are fairly common in the North of Victoria, and South-West of New South Wales. I do not know much of their habits, but imagine their food consists of various seeds and small insects. As far as I know, the sexes are alike, as all the specimens I obtained resemble one another. The Allied Pardalote is a little larger than the Spotted variety (the drawing is life-size) and has the markings more in the form of streaks than spots. The mark over the eyre runs completely over the base of the upper mandible, and is cadmium-yellow in front and white behind. The beak is greyish olive without markings, and the upper tail-coverts warm olive-brown i8o instead of crimson. The wings have, in place of spots, the feathers margined with white, and the bastard wing is decorated with brilliant scarlet. The under parts are greyer than in its Spotted relative, but in other respects its colouring and markings are not dissimilar. I have only seen these birds mentioned in Gould’s “ Birds of Australia,” but that may merely be ignorance on my part. It seems a pity, however, that they are not better known, and I, for one, should be delighted to obtain some living specimens. Norman B. Roberts. The following answer has been sent to Mr. Roberts : — The Spotted Pardalote was imported by Mr. J. Abrahams in 1882, and he forwarded a pair to Dr. Russ ; but unfortunately they arrived dead. The allied Panther-bird has, I believe, never been imported. Our Zoological Society has never owned examples of any species of Pardalotus. There is no reason why these pretty little birds should not be kept quite as easily as Tits, which they resemble in their actions, habits and food. They build domed nests in holes, either in trees or in the earth ; lay white eggs, and feed upon seeds, buds, and insects. What do you wish done with your charming coloured drawing? It is quite fit for publication. A. G. Butter. NOTES ON VARIOUS SPECIES. Sir, — Dr. Butler is undoubtedly correct in stating that the cock Nonpareil does not change colour in winter, at all events not invariably. For five years I have kept one in an open aviary, and, beyond so much of a duller tone as may be caused by the natural wear of the feathers at the end of the season, he undergoes absolutely no change of colour. I may say, however, that so experienced an aviculturist as Mr. Abrahams differs from me on this point : he has observed that birds under his care lose the bright blue on the head, while the red breast assumes a yellow tinge in the winter. Possibly individuals may vary in this particular. In May, 1896, I purchased two hen Nonpareils, which I selected out of a cageful of two or three dozen ; these I placed with my cock bird and have twice had nests and eggs, but without further result. The Nonpareil is decidedly a shy and timid bird, probably requiring ample space or freedom from the disturbing influence of other birds, to breed successfully. I fancy too much is made of the insectivorous habits of this species. At one time I supplied them rather freely with caterpillars and mealworms, but I have ceased doing so for some years with no ill results : in fact they are, if anything, more disposed to nest now than before. Of course, in an open air aviary birds are able to obtain a fair proportion of insects for themselves. The Dhyae. — “Quarrelsome” is almost too mild an epithet to apply to this otherwise charming species. My bird possesses an absolutely demoniacal temper. His aviary companions are rather too large to be trifled with, and he therefore considers it safer to vent his spleen on his less formidable owner. The moment I open the door of his aviary, he descends on me with the utmost fury, usually attacking my hands with all the force he can put into his beak, and frequently succeeding in drawing blood ; at times he alights on my shoulders, digging his beak into my neck, or, if in an unusually good humour, merely attempting to pull out my hair. At one time, I had a Shamah who also was of opinion that I was meant to be eaten, but he was mildness itself compared with the Dhyal. For the past two seasons a cock Red-lieaded Bunting ( Emberiza luteola) and a hen Saffron Finch, in one of niv outdoor aviaries, have paired, built a nest in a box and laid eggs; these, I suppose, could hardly be expected to prove fertile, at all events, they have never hatched. I have noticed, lately, a number of the Japanese Bunting ( E . rutila) at a bird shop ; it seems to be seldom imported. I had for some years a pair given me by the late Mr. Allon, which he received, I think, from Germany. They are handsome birds : the cock bright chestnut above and yellow beneath, with a brown patch on the throat; the hen is generally pale and without the throat patch. Their disposition is rather timid, but they are very hardy. The cock has a bright little song, which is, however, not very noticeable. I do not remember to have noticed any remarks on the North American White-throated Song Sparrow {Zonotrichia albicollis) in the pages of the Magazine, and conclude that it is a rare bird in captivity. A pair has been in my collection since November, 1897. During the first winter they resided in an indoor aviary ; in the following spring they were removed to outdoor quarters, where they have since remained. In disposition this species is shy and retiring, the hen especially so, taking the shortest possible flights and quickly taking refuge under cover when observed. Through the spring and summer months, the exceedingly high-pitched and reiterated notes of the cock are almost incessant during the day and even frequent at night ; the hen also sings at times, but her short and scrappy song is more of a Bunting character, though loud and harsh. I have never noticed these birds to be at all pugnacious, as might perhaps have been expected. The Diuca is another bird that sings freely at night, especially when the moon is shining brightly. W. H. Hudson, in “ Idle Days in Patagonia,” writes very enthusiatically of the song of this bird, and it is certainly bright and cheerful ; but, as rendered in captivity, I think this is about as much as can be said for it ; in the silence of night, however, it can be heard distinctly at a considerable distance. This species does not seem to be as hardv as one would expect— a pair I attempted to winter in the open, succumbed to the inclemency of the season. In a moderately heated aviary it gives no trouble, and, if afforded plenty of space, would probably breed freely. My birds once nested, but the eggs were thrown out and broken when on the point of hatching. The moulting of the Avadavat has always been rather a puzzle to me. My birds are kept indoors. I have, unfortunately, never taken any notes on the subject, and cannot, therefore, speak precisely, but roughly I should say Mr. Page’s dates are about usual. The puzzling part, however, is that, besides the more or less regular yearly moult, there are various and frequent subsidiary changes of colour. I shall endeavour, in future, to make more accurate observations on this interesting subject. Whilst referring to colour changes, I should like to record an observation on the assumption of colour in the genus Pyromelana. This spring I had occasion to catch an Orange Bishop, at the time when the change was commencing. While handling the bird, I noticed that the red feathers on the head were a palpably fresh growth and not, as is generally believed, merely a change in the colour of the old feathers. I have had as little success in breeding this year as Mr. Savage. Some half-dozen Zebra Finches are all I can boast of, though I have had plenty of other nests but not a single hatch. Green Cardinals have three times built and laid eggs ; in previous years they have regularly hatched out and then killed and cast out their young; this year they have more humanely cast forth the eggs instead. R. A. Todd. BREEDING RESULTS. Sir, — In the hope that other members may be induced to give their experiences of the breeding season just closing, I give a few notes of what has occurred here. A pair of Parrot-finches reared a brood of four fine young, the nest¬ lings leaving the nest-box the first week in July7. The red feathers are now being gradually assumed. A pair of Black-headed Gouldian Finches, bred by a friend last Autumn, are now sitting in a box suspended in the outer portion of their aviary. My Long-tailed Grassfinches nested, but the eggs proved unfertile, or the young perished at an early stage. The pair are now going to nest again. Several nests have been made during the Summer by the Cordon-bleus, of which I have had three pairs in perfect condition for two years; but, for various reasons, there were no results till last week, when, from a nest cleverly fitted into an angle of the roof under a gutter, a brood flew. Unluckily, the youngsters were not expected so soon, and no precautions were taken for their safety; with the result that one of my Rollers was seen the first thing one morning with a young Cordon-bleu in his bill, beating its life out against a perch. Of course, the Rollers were at once shut off, and now there is one remaining Cordon-bleu flying about and doing well. The dead nestling showed a blue wart in the angle of the mouth each side, and on the palate three dark spots, reminding me of the moutli-decoration of the Gouldian Finches described in the Magazine last Autumn by Dr. Butler. I was anxious to give every chance to the Rollers, which at one time appeared likely7 to breed ; and no doubt the small birds confined with them, though quite accustomed to the larger birds as a rule, were disturbed by the Rollers’ restlessness at times, and I know several nests were forsaken from this cause. Of this pair of Rollers, the male was very anxious to nest, and was continually going in and out of a hollow log. He is very7 tame and impudent, and, in the Spring, when I went into his aviary, he would fly7 on to my head ; and if I put up my hand to push him off, he would retaliate with digs of his powerful bill. The hen bird was timid, and as she declined the dainties offered by7 her mate, he used to come to me, and try to push the mealworm, or black-beetle, under my7 collar, or into the folds of my cap. Finding his mate indifferent, he became aggressive, and for some weeks she was rather seriously persecuted. Since the Summer moult commenced, I am glad to say that he has become more gentle towards her, and I may7 have more success another Spring, for the hen is much less shy than she was. To the Rollers, at any rate to the very tame one referred to, I must attribute the loss of the first brood of Chinese Painted Quail. The Rollers had, up to the time of the hatching of the Quail, shown no signs of hostility towards the smallest of their companions ; but the sight of the i83 poor little chicks was too much for the Rollers, and several were seen to be swallowed, only two being rescued, and subsequently reared. My Diamond Doves have just reared a young one, the newly-hatched young of a previous nest having been destroyed by some Rock Thrushes. A pair of Scops Owls nested in a log ; but they were not at that time in the excellent condition of those described in the last number by Mr. Meade- Waldo, and the eggs came to nothing. My Pin-tailed Sand-Grouse laid several clutches of their beautiful eggs, and in one case three were hatched ; but they were very weak from the first, and after a few days died. The Black- bellied Sand-Grouse also laid several clutches, but declined to sit. Of larger birds, we have a young Snowy Owl, and four young Eider Ducks, two of them now full-grown. W. H. ST. QuinTin. THE ORANGE-WINGED AMAZON. I once possessed, for a few weeks or months, an example of this species ( Chrysotis amazonica). The bird had been in the possession of acquaintances of mine for about three years, and was given to me by them. It never said anything beyond “ Polly,” which was uttered fairly distinctly ; was by no means tame ; and seemed lacking in intelligence. While in the cage in which it had lived at its old home, it had the habit of turning a somersault under its perch, and uttering at the same time an ear-piercing imitation of the sound of a rusty pump — when transferred to a different cage it abandoned this habit, but returned to it on going back to the old cage. In appearance this species is much like the Blue-fronted — so much so that an inexperienced person might confuse them. It is, I think, larger than the Blue-fronted, and of a gaunter and much less pleasing appearance. The expression of the bird being somewhat forbidding, while the Blue- fronted is amiable-looking. I soon got rid of my specimen, as I did not take to it. Horatio R. Fiu.mer. THE AGE OF CAGE-BIRDS. Sir, — M}r experience is that birds live comfortably and happily for many years in cages, if properly treated. My niece has a Lizard Canary, a cock, which her brother brought to her in December, 1889. It was given to him by a friend who had had it for two years, so it must be nearly twelve years old. Here it lives in a cage 36 inches long, 26 inches high, and 19 inches wide. It alwaj^s has plenty of river sand on the floor of its cage, and every variety of food that is good for it. It is very cheerful, and sang merrily all the spring. In the same cage are two other birds — a Red Cardinal and an American Sparrow, hens — both of which have been here since November, 1892, which makes them just seven years old. Edith Harrison. THE Bvtcultural *Hbaga3met BEING THE JOURNAL OF THE AVICULTURAL SOCIETY. VOL. V. — No. 60. All rights reserved. OCTOBER, 1899. THE CHINESE BULBUL. Pycnonotus sinensis. By A. G. Butler, Ph.D. This is rather a pretty bird, mostly ashy and olive- yellowish above ; brownish, yellow and white below ; the head and neck may be roughly described as black and brown with conspicuous white patches on crown, sides of head and throat ; the wing and tail feathers dark brown edged with yellow. I have been unable to come across any notes on the nesting habits of this Bulbul, yet it must be a tolerably widely distributed and common species : there has been a fair number in the market this year, and I secured a healthy example on June 8th which I still possess: I feed it upon my soft mixture, orange, banana, and mealworms. Dr. Russ seems to have been unacquainted with this bird when he published his Handbook in 1887, but it is included in volume II. of his larger work “ Die fremdlandischen Weich- futterfresser,” published during the present year : he quotes the following short note on its habits from Pere David. “ The bird is abundantly distributed over the whole south of China up to the neighbourhood of the river Nautsekiang. It is evidently a very gentle and tame bird, which one sees throughout the year in the gardens at Shanghai, but never in the woods or in the mountains. It confines itself continually to cultivated country where berries and insects are never lacking to it. Sitting upon the top of a bamboo or tree it gives voice to a deep, tolerably pleasant sounding, but little varied song.” Dr. Russ speaks of having received this species hap¬ hazard : he says that “ when chasing its mate, it hops round her either 011 branches or the ground with highly erected crest and nape feathers, drooping wings and fan-like tail, it indeed appears to be white-headed ; but then it puffs out its entire plumage, so that it seems considerably larger than it actually is. Now it gets i85 out of the way of no other bird, even though it be the largest and most powerful inhabitant of the bird-room, moreover I have noticed that even the much larger Cassiques or Starling-like birds and Military-Starlings avoid quarrelling with it. Indeed they by no means attacked it, but invariably got out of its way. All other birds, equally large or small it drove from its vicinity or chased them away. It was only malicious to its red-cheeked relatives.” Dr. Russ’ pair went to nest in 1893, but the first nest was destroyed through the interference of a Porto Rico Pigeon ( Columba squamosa ) ; indeed he says he lost two broods from this cause. Eventually the hen Pigeon died and he took the cock out, so now he says he hopes to have satisfactory results. It appears that Mr. Eangheinz owned a remarkably tame specimen of this Bulbul, which would alight on the food-basin whilst still in his hand and would not even leave the banquet when he touched it with his finger and strove to push it away. “ Whoever then can give the time to it will soon be able to make this Bulbul finger-tame.” My own experience of the Chinese Bulbul is— -that it is the most nervous and least confiding species that I have hitherto owned ; which clearly proves that it is quite impossible to decide as to the temperament of a species from the study of one individual : however, since my example was purchased it has become a little quieter, and does not invariably rattle all over the cage when I give it fresh food. The song is short, rapid, but rather brilliant, with a distindt sound of high piano -notes in it ; the length and character of it may perhaps be expressed by the following — Tiddle tend, tiddle tiddle terut, uttered as quickly as possible : it seldom varies much. THE BLUE-FRONTED AMAZON. By Reginald Phieeipps. The best talking Parrot that I ever myself came across was a Blue-fronted Amazon, in one of Mr. J. Abrahams’ private rooms. All its natural notes had been obliterated, or at any rate suppressed ; and the bird kept up a constant flow of plainly- spoken sentences and well-sung songs. At a meeting of the old Cage Bird Club, I referred to this Parrot ; and another member present stated that the best talker he had ever met with likewise was a Blue-fronted Amazon. 1 86 My own experience with this species is that, when young, it learns quickly, but that it forgets a great deal after a time, and that, as it grows older, its powers of learning seem to fail. For many years a male of this species, belonging to my sou, was in my charge. He learned a few things well and more imperfectly. His laughter was always a pleasure to listen to ; and his “Shake a paw,” as he raised his right foot and clasped one’s extended finger, was, and still is, perfect. He picked up from me “You old Fool” practically straight away, and for some time revelled in the sentence, playing on the word “ Fool ” with great emphasis and satisfaction. On one occasion, he was on a long perch in the garden aviary when I brought in a lady to see the birds. With bristling feathers, excitedly hurrying backwards and forwards, he instantly struck up “You old Fool ; Fool ; Fool ; you old Fool,” never stopping for a moment until the lady, greatly offended, and regarding it as a personal affront, abruptly withdrew into the house. At one time, in my dining-room, where Polly was kept, I had a Blue-cheeked Barbet. Anyone who has kept the male of this species will be acquainted with its curious water-bubbling note. Polly quickly picked it up, and, although this was many years ago, still uses it as one of his favourite calls. Having learned it, he came to regard it as his own ; and when the Barbet uttered his own call Polty would go mad with rage, thinking he was being mocked, and almost frantic in his endeavours to get at him. Polly could be terribly cruel. One day I carried him into the garden, when he espied in a dark corner, well out of my reach, a Scops Owl. I had forgotten, for the moment, that the male was not in hiding as usual, but was keeping guard just outside the nest on which the female was sitting. I heard Polly utter a horrible chuckle, the import of which I knew well, and at once realized the danger. I uttered a howl which might have awakened the dead, — which Polly disregarded — and made a rush for a long-handled net ; but it was too late. Polly gave but one crunch ; and the poor little hero fell with a sickening thud, a bloody shapeless mass ; the Parrot’s long upper mandible had entered the back, smashed up one of the shoulders into splints, and laid open the vitals. This was one of a few occasions which I have experienced in bird-keeping when I had to bottle up my wrath veiy tightly^ — for I could have torn Polly limb from limb in my hot anger. Marvellous to relate, the Scops recovered, fully recovered his health, but of course was never able to fly again. iSy When in the garden, Polly did not by any means always have his own way. He was universally detested ; and some of the Jays and Pies played him many a pretty trick. The male Struthidea, too, had a pleasing little way of suddenly pouncing down upon him, and knocking him headlong from his perch. But the Hunting Cissa was his pet aversion. The male Cissa is a terrible scamp, and as cunning a rogue as may be found in Asia. Polly is brought into the garden, and placed on a long perch, and along the perch he trots ; but he suddenly stops and looks nervously round, and finds that the Cissa has suddenly appeared on the same perch behind him ; — -but he is looking the other way, and seems so innocent, that Polly trots on again. He quickly stops, however, and looks anxiously back ; but the Cissa, although certainly much nearer, is only indus¬ triously wiping his bill. Again Polly trots off, but suddenly stops short, for the Cissa, who is still wiping his bill, is now close behind him. Polly is in a quandary ; if he turns once more, he knows what is in store for him ; for the Cissa never lost an opportunity of pulling Polly’s tail, and this he would do with no gentle tweak, but with a tug so vicious that Polty would yelp like a toe-trodden puppy. So nervous did Polly become that, eventually, when put out, he would at once fly into a sheltered corner where he could not be attacked from behind, and there he would stay until taken in again. What with Polly’s jealousy of, and madness towards, some of the other birds, and his horrible and continuous screaming when not being petted, he was voted a nuisance, and, after some years, was handed over to a niece, who pays him unremitting attention. Mr. Dutton refers to the uncertainty of the temper of the Amazons. There is no such uncertainty about Polly. His present owner hardly dares to let Polly out of his cage because of the difficulty she experiences in getting him back again, for Polly will be pretty certain to bite her if thwarted. But to-da}% as in the past, Polly obeys 1113^ orders in a moment, because he knows I am master. With the larger Parrots, Cockatoos, Horses, and Sunday Scholars, if you are not master you are nowhere. Teach them first and foremost to respect you, and then you may shew kindness, but to begin with and to trust to kindness, and kindness alone, is fatal. Of course these remarks do not apply to timid birds, only to the savage and strong, and to those who have sufficient reasoning powers to know right from wrong. Occasionally I pay Polly a visit ; and the moment my 1 88 voice is heard wild cries resound through the house, for I still stand first in his affections. And when I open the cage-door and he comes on to my hand, — with every feather on end, with wings extended and tail outspread, quivering with excitement, and talking and laughing away to his utmost capacity — it is difficult to imagine a more attractive creature ; and I wonder to myself how I ever could have hacl the heart to part with Polly. Polly often “ nested,” and would certainly have bred with me if he had had a mate. CORRESPONDENCE. DISTINCTION OF THE SEXES IN PENNANT PARRAKEETS. [We have received a letter from Mr. Farrar in which he states (i) that he has no Adelaide Parrakeets, either cocks or hens (2) that he knows the difference between Adelaides and Pennants perfectly well (3) that all his birds are common Pennants (. Platycercus elegans ). Unfortunately his letter is worded in a needlessly aggressive wa}’ — and we therefore consider it better not to insert it.] Sir, — I saw Mr. Farrar’s Pennants not a fortnight ago, and I most emphatically say that, in my opinion, there is no doubt whatever about their being ordinary Pennants. Does Dr. Butler imagine that Mr. Farrar does not know a Pennant from an Adelaide ? The hen Pennant is quite easily distinguished from the cock by the dull bricky-red of her colour; her small rounded head, and, as Mr. Farrar says, absolutely certainly by her tail, the middle of which is green, whereas, in the cock it is deep blue. I saw Mr. Farrar’s first hen Pennant, and though she was more orangey-red in colour, she had the same shaped head and the same tail colouring. I have a hen Pennant, at present, identical with Mr. Farrar’s No. 2 hen, and I know another member of the Society who has one also. Young Pennants, moreover, are not “ all green,” as Dr. Butler asserts ; nor “all brown,” as Mr. Gedney affirms; but marked precisely as Mr. Farrar says in his recent article. G. LE C. Grace. Sir,— As you invite notes on this subject, I should like to say a few words on the matter. In the first place, I may say that during the last six or seven years I have had a dozen or more of these birds. I have three at present, one cock and two hens — the cock is identical with Mr. Farrar’s description of his ( v ) The dispute is about the female in Mr. Farrar’s possession— we believe the male is admitted by all to be an ordinary Pennant Parrakeet. Will Mr. Oates tell us whether his own hens shew the same difference from the cock (in plumage) as Mr. Farrar’s does?— Ed. 1 89 male bird (v), and I doubt very much whether Dr. Butler or any other person ever saw an adult full-plumaged cock with centre tail-feathers green. In addition to blue tail, you must look for a bold masculine head, brilliant colour, and size. On August 29th I had the pleasure of seeing the birds in question, both young and old, and I consider them typical birds of P. elegans. Would Dr. Butler sav whether the bird he calls Adelaide Broadtail is identical with the Yellow-rumped Parrakeet illustrated and described by Dr. Greene, in vol. II. p. 8 of “ Parrots in Captivity ” ? ( b ) F. W. Oates. Sir, — If I may venture to comment upon Mr. Farrar’s letter, published in the September number, about the colouring of the female Pennant, I would say that I believe I possessed a true pair of these birds, which I kept in 1113’ outdoor aviaries for a year (I still have the male bird), and the only difference I could discern between the male and the female was that the latter had a smaller head, with an altogether feminine appearance, when side by side with her mate. To a practised eye the difference was decided. The colouring was the same, except that in the female it was less brilliant. I regret that she died, as also did a hen Crimson-wing about the same time, whilst her mate (as in the case of the Pennant) still survives. This is only too often the case. I believe the foot-note of A. G. B. is, probably, quite correct, with regard to Mr. P'arrar’s remarks. Do not all young Australian Parrakeets resemble, for the most part, the adult female when the}' leave the nest ? It is not likely, if the Pennants bred in Mr. Farrar’s aviary were pure, that some would have green tail centres, and some blue. This fact seems to me to show that the male and female are of different species, and that two have taken after the mother, and three after the father (Platycercus adelaidce and P. elegans respectively). Naturally, one would not like to state this as an absolute surety, for, whatever one’s experience, one can always be open to correction. May I be allowed, in all courtesy, to say that it seems a pity that letters should be couched in a style which do not exactly assist an Editor in the somewhat difficult task of correcting or offering his help in pointing out mistakes on the part of the writers ? Neither do I think that Mr. Fillmer’s original comment upon Mr. Farrar’s original letter about Pennants was in the least ‘ impolite.’ Mr. Fillmer’s duty was to state what he believed to be a wrong impression, and in that statement he took care to say that his remarks were not aimed at Mr. Farrar personally, but would apply to all articles published in the Magazine. Readers of it would not weary of Mr. Farrar’s articles on birds (as such they are most interesting), but would they not soon grow weary of a (3) Certainly not ; but that is probably the bird which Mr. Farrar takes for the Adelaide Broadtail. The latter corresponds in every respect with Mr. Farrar’s description of his supposed female Pennants and is the only species which (in both sexes) answers to his description of the hen. If Mr. Oates has birds so-coloured, and believes them to be hen Pennants, I am afraid he will have to alter his opinion ; it is not probable that there are two forms of female Pennants, one almost identical in every respect with the male, and the other indistinguishable from the hen of the Adelaide Broadtail.— A. G. B. tone of defiance towards tlie Editor, or towards anyone who ventures to disagree with the writer ? I hope that Mr. Farrar will not take umbrage at what I have, I trust in courteous language, tried to say ; for I feel, and probably many others with me, that courtesy* and not too much prominence given to ‘ thinks I,’ are two of the most advisable means for carrying on any' correspondence in a proper spirit. In any' case, whether the young Parrakeets bred by' Mr. Farrar are pure Pennants or not, it is a very interesting experience, and one decidedly not to he kept in the background. Hubert I). Asteey. Sir, — Seeing in the letter of the Rev. C. D. Farrar that he is the first to rear Pennant Parrakeets— I have bred about twenty in the last six years (c), and have had hens breed freely that are bred in my' outdoor unheated garden -aviary' ; but all my birds, when in adult plumage, are identical. The males are larger, have much flatter heads, and are more aggressive in the Spring. I have had as many as six in one nest. I find they7 so often die after they7 have left the nest about ten days. I have only one pair now. The seed, etc., should be put where it is no trouble for them to find it. This season I have bred three King Parrakeets. eight Peach-faced Lovebirds, three Red-headed Rosellas, and several Budgerigars. My Red- mantled Parrakeets had two young ones : they died when about two weeks old. Edwd. Le Heup Cocicsedge. Sir, — I do not think that Mr. Farrar is right about Pennants. One ■of mine has just died, and post mortem examination proved it to be a hen — there was not a single green feather in her tail, and the only differences from the male, that I could see, were that the head was smaller and the plumage not quite so bright. (Mrs.) M. B. Lancaster. I have carefully examined the series of skins of the Pennant Parrakeet (commonly7 called Platycercus pennanti, but P. elegans in the Cat. Birds Brit. Mus.) and of the Adelaide Parrakeet (P. adelaidce) at the British Museum, in the company of Dr. Butler. There are several skins of the first named which are marked as being those of females, and these are distinguished from the rest by' their smaller size and slightly duller colour — but not, so far as I could see, by' any such differences of tint as are stated by7 Mr. Farrar to exist in the case of his Parrakeets. If it be admitted that Mr. Pkirrar’s female is a true example of P, elegans, he is still as far off as ever from proving that all females of the species differ from the male in the same wav as his does. Mr. Farrar’s female Parrakeet may be a Pennant, or it may be an Adelaide, or it may be neither — I am not concerned to prove what it is. All I say about it is simply this, — that if the hen in question differs from the male Pennant in (c) And see also a case of breeding Platycercus elegans mentioned in the U. K. Foreign Cage-Bird Soc, Report for January, 1893.— Ed. the manner and to the extent stated by Mr. Farrar, it is not a typical adult specimen of P. elegant, and Mr. Farrar has not proved that such differences are true sexual characteristics. P. adelaidce agrees remarkably in many respects with Mr. Farrar’s description of the female. It differs from P. elegant in having the crimson replaced by orange-red; the violet on the chin is much paler ; the feathers on the back have traces of a colour which Mr. Farrar describes as that of the strand Magazine ; the tail has a more decided greenish tint ; the legs are greyer. It therefore seems to me very probable that Dr. Butler’s solution of the difficulty may be the true one— but I do not pledge myself to that or any other theory. It is somewhat curious that in Mr. Farrar’s article on “The Sex of Pennants ” he describes the centre tail feathers of the cock as “black” (vol. iv. p. 108), while in his article on “The Nesting of the Pennant” he calls them “ rich violet ” (page 176 of this vol.), and Mr. Grace and Mr. Oates, in their letters printed above, describe the colour as “ blue.” Horatio R. Fiermer. NOTES AND QUERIES. Sir, — I hope you will excuse the casual nature of the present “Notes and Queries,” suggested by recent communications to our Magazine. Shatnas, etc. I was much interested in Miss Alderson’s account of her birds ; her experience of this species tallies remarkably with mine in at least two points. A male bird I kept some time by himself used to bask on the floor with outspread wings, in just the way she describes, and like no other bird I know. Also, when first put in a cage together with a hen, he attacked and persecuted her furiously. Afterwards, when both were placed in a much larger cage together, she turned the tables on him, and led him such a life that I had to remove her altogether. I infer from this that, with Shamas, a long and formal introduction is necessary if a pair are to agree, and I think Miss Alderson is doing very right in keeping hers apart. The Shama, like other members of the Thrush family, seems naturally un¬ sociable even with the other sex of its own species, but even sociable species may at times refuse to chum up at first. Some time ago, when joint Secretary to the Zoo here, I introduced a hen Liothrix into a cage where a bachelor male had long remained. He immediately made violent love to her, showing off with his wings slightly- expanded and inclined sideway-s, like some Pheasants, and breast rather puffed out — but she would have nothing to do with him, either then or a long time after, though they are as friendly as possible now, like their charming species as a rule. Does Liothrix , by the way, always show off in this way ? This is the only occasion on which I have ever seen it done, and I have kept several of both sexes myself. Also, does the Hedge-Sparrow (Accentor modularis) which is sometimes considered very nearly akin to Liothrix, ever cuddle up to and caress its companions, and employ its foot for holding its food ? These habits are most characteristic of Liothrix, and of the Babbler family-, to which it undoubtedly belongs, generally. Food for Waterfowl. Miss Alderson should take care that her pond contains plenty- of water-snails, small enough for her birds to swallow. I have observed many species of Ducks, and find that these molluscs are a favourite food with them, especially with the diving kinds ; two Flam- 192 ingoes, even, that I kept, used to eat them, judging from their swallowing movements. Mimicry by Birds in a Wild State. My experience in India corrobor¬ ates Mr. C. Harrison’s, in that I have never heard a wild Parrakeet imitate another bird. In England, however, I have heard a Starling give the Peewit’s call, and I fancy our common Mynahs ( Acridotheres tristis ) here are natural mockers. Emerald Bird of Paradise. Mr. H. J. Fulljauies, with whose dis¬ appointment, after his very plucky purchase, I most heartily sympathise, may be interested to know that for some years we have had males of both the Large rnd Small Emerald Birds at the Calcutta Zoo. F. Finn. BLUE ROBINS. Sir,— I fear Miss West’s experience in breeding Blue Robins is that of many others : failure in rearing the young is very frequent. Some aviculturists have been more fortunate than others, probably where the birds have been kept in large outdoor aviaries and were able to find there part of the natural food they require to feed their young upon. Under other circumstances, non-success in rearing the young is often the result. Probably few soft-billed birds nest more readily in confinement than Blue Robins, that is, build nests, la}' eggs and hatch them : but rearing the young is another thing. A young hen Blue Robin was once reared in my aviary, and she had young the following year, but they all died at a very tender age. I saw my birds treat their young exactly as Miss West’s did, and carry them, dead or dying, about the aviary — the fuss and noise they made in doing so attracted my attention. I mentioned this in the Magazine in July, 1S95, and sent, a little later, a few notes on breeding these birds. The greater part of my time from the middle of September until towards June, is spent in travelling on the Continent, and during that time my birds are looked after by others, servants chiefly ; so I have given up keeping soft-food birds, for I find, during my absences, they don’t get the care and attention they should have, and most servants object to touching the “ horrid mess ” the birds require for food. They (the servants) probably do their best, but it is a very poor “ best ” sometimes — it is better therefore to leave soft-billed birds alone, than keep them and not have them properly looked after, as would be the case with me. A. Savage. SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE BREEDING (AND ATTEMPTED BREEDING) OF FOREIGN BIRDS. Sir, — According to most avicultural books, Parrakeet-breeding is not at all a difficult matter, providing only you have a good-sized aviary fitted up with logs, nests, etc. I must say my experience does not quite bear this out, and I am acquainted with other Yorkshire aviarists whose experience is the same. I have always had a love for birds, and when quite a little chap in petticoats, nothing gave me greater pleasure than to get hold of a young one, which I generally managed to rear. Up to a few years ago I devoted most of my attention to Britishers, mostly insectivorous, since which I have gradually drifted to the foreign J93 species ; but to hark back to the Parrakeets. The great difficulty with most species is to get a true pair, and then, if newly-imported, to get them acclimatised. It is generally useless to expect them to breed the first season, indeed, it is better not to encourage them to do so, and there is less danger from egg-binding if not allowed to nest until their second season. Some three or four years ago, I had an ambition to breed Mealy Rosellas. I procured a couple from our esteemed member Mr. Housden ; in his opinion they were a true pair, they were young birds and had their heads splashed with red. I eventually (after twelve months keep) proved them to be both cocks. Advertising one in the Magazine, I sold it to a gentleman in Surrey. An advertisement for a hen failed to have the desired effect, and it was not until the August following, 1898, that I procured one — a newly-imported bird, in poor condition and very weakly. With a lot of careful nursing and attention I brought her round, and she has re¬ warded me this Spring by going to nest and successfully rearing two fine young ones. I am in hopes the}7 will even do better next season. I also might add that in an adjoining box a pair of Cockatiels have brought off a nest of five — this speaks well for the disposition and amia¬ bility of both pairs. The other inhabitants of this portion of the aviar}7 are Red-rumps, Blossom-heads, Blue-wings and Madagascar Love-birds. It may be of interest to note that, in another division of the aviary, I have a brace of Chinese Quails, a week old at the time of writing. Last year they got as far as perfectly-formed young in eggs, but failed to hatch. F. W. Oates. THE NEvSTING OF THE CRIMSONWING. Sir, — I quite hoped to send, next month, to the Magazine, an account of the successful rearing of the Crimsonwing ; but, alas, I have been disappointed on the very verge of success. I had three beautiful youngsters hatched from three eggs ; fed most carefully by their parents, and feathering well, and nearly a month old; when, lo, there came two bitter cold nights after the tropical week in July, and they took a chill and died. I could have wept tears of vexation and disappointment over their untimely death. So near to success and then to have to wait another year ! Mr. F. W. Oates, one of our members and a great friend of mine, has to-day seen the bodies, and he will certify in a note what grand birds they were. I have no heart to write any more ; but if we live another year, I hope to succeed. C. D. Farrar. THE AGE OF CAGE-BIRDS. Sir, — Regarding the age of cage-birds, my aunt had a Cardinal bought in Malta in 1SS1, age unknown, which died last August (1898) thus reaching the age of 17^ years, which, I think, must be unusual in a bird of that size. (Mrs.) R. Sherbrooke. 194 HYBRIDS. Mr. Frank F. Lambert, of Beverley, lias this summer bred three hybrids between the Spice Bird or Nutmeg Finch and the Bengalese. Horatio R. Fieemer. TORTOISES. Sir,— Since we have opened our columns to the reptilian allies of our feathered friends, I thought I might as well send the following extract, by way of showing that the lady Mr. Phillipps tells us of, in the July number, was not so far out after all (d). I may also mention that in 1S92 I brought an African Water-Tortoise ( Pelomedusa gabata ) home without food, from Mombasa to London. From the Proceedings , Asiatic Society of Bengal, for fune, iSqq. “ Mr. F. Finn exhibited a living Soft-shelled Tortoise (Emyda sp. ?) and read the following remarks by W. K. Dods, Esq. “ ‘ I got the Turtle (exhibited) on the evening of the 1st April when out after Eld’s Deer, on one of the grassy plains near the mouth of the Sittang River. Though dry and burnt up at the time of my visit, this ground is a swamp at least seven mouths in the year, after which, when the water, even in the Buffalo-wallows, begins to disappear, the Turtles and Water-snakes bury themselves in the mud, and lie off till the first Monsoon rains soften the soil and release them for another season. This particular individual was under about two inches of soil, so dry and heated by the sun as to be most disagreeable to walk on even with the protection to one’s feet afforded by a heavy pair of shooting boots. Originally the ground had been covered by a thick growth of grass, but that had all been burnt off about a month before by a jungle fire, exposing the cracked soil to the full rays of the sun, and the small round breatliing-hole to the sharp eyes of my Burman guide. It was quite lively when dug out, and has never to my knowledge eaten anything since. It seems equally indifferent whether its residence is in a bag, a basket, an empty cartridge box, or a pail of water. I saw the shells of several others lying about, but whether they met then- end by jungle fires or other causes I could not find out.’ “ Mr. Finn also exhibited a head of the Clucking Teal ( Nettium formosum ) from a specimen shot in India recently, and made remarks upon it.” F. Finn. (d) If we are to admit reptiles (and they are certainly deserving- of notice) would it not be well to try and amalgamate our Magazine with th & Zoologist ? in which I see an avicultural corner has very properly been started at Dr. Butler’s suggestion. — F. F. I am quite sure that our member Mr. R. Phillipps never intended to introduce Reptiles into the Magazine when he wrote his short paragraph on his friend’s Tortoise. I am also quite sure that there would not be room in the Zoologist for the Avicultural Magazine. — A. G. B. The insertion of Mr. Phillipps’ and Mr. Finn’s communications must not be taken as an indication of an intention to throw the Magazine open to zoological subjects other than ornithological— though personally I am strongly in favour of such a course. Such a change of policy would require the approval of the Council. It would not, I think, be wise to go beyond the vertebrates. — H. R. F. INDEX TO SUBJECTS PAGE Ages to which Birds attain in Confinement 8l, III, 120, 121, 150, 167, 183, 193 Amazon Parrots 44, 83, 128, 161, 183, 185 Avadavat ... 24, 59, 75, 150, 162, 181 Aviaries, Mr. Cresswell’s ... 151 Aviculture, The Limits of Legitimate 54 Mimicry by Birds in a Wild State Mocking-bird, American ... Mynah, Malabar Nonpareil PAGE 116, 137, 192 23, 167 ... 23 165, 180 Bearded Tit ... .. ... 165 Bicheno’s Finch ... ... 107 Bird-catchers, Proposed Licensing of 80, 98, 109, no, 123, 135 Blackbird ... ... ... 117 Blackcap ... ... .. 70 Blue Robin ... ... 151, 192 Boynton, Bart., The late Sir H. S. ... 140 Bulbul, Chinese ... ... 184 Bulbul, Persian ... ... ... 1 19 Bunting, Japanese ... ... 181 Bunting, Red-headed ... ... 181 •Canary — Saffron -finch Hybrid ... 20 •Cardinal. Virginian ... ... 2, 5 Cherry Finch ... ... ... 23 •Chinese Painted Quail ... ... 1 Chough, Cornish ... ... 73 Classes for common Waxbills ... 40 Combasou, Long-tailed ... 39, 59, 71 Cordon-bleu ... ... 141, 182 Crimson Finch 37, 38, 58, Crossbills Crystal Palace Shows Cuckoo 72, 75, 100, 112, 150 ... 24 .. 8, 87 ... 39 Owl, Scops ... 159 ,, Snowy 72 Panther-bird ... 179 Paradise, Bird of, Emerald 138, 192 Parrakeet— Adelaide 178, 188 ,, Blossom-headed ... 119 ,, Crimson-wing 23 ,, Golden-shouldered ••• *57 ,, King 23, 190 ,, Lord Derby’s ... .. 144 ,, Pennant’s 176, 188 ,, Princess of Wales’s ... 168 ,, Redmantled ... ... 190 ,, Redrump 23, 28, ISO Parrot Finch ... 20, 21, 13^, 182 ,, Gray ... 164 ,, Notes 44. 83, 128 Pennants, The Sex of 176, 188 Pheasant, Chinese Ring-necked ... 149 Photographing Birds 95, XI° Pin-tailed Nonpareil 37, 38, 76 Protection of Birds ... 123 Pytelia nielba and P. afra ... ... 164 Quail, Chinese Painted ... ... 1 Dhyal-bird Diuca Finch Double-banded Finch Dove, Bronze-necked ,, Diamond ... ,, Hybrid ... ,, Notes on ... ., Wells’ Ground Dried Flies 145, 180 76, 181 ... 107 ... 1 18 35, 74, 183 ... 149 ... 66 95 36, 77 Eider Duck IX5 Feather-eating Parrot ... ... 75 ■Gouldian Finch.. ... 74, 182 ,, ,, Ornamentation of Mouth of Young... 25 Grass-seeds for Waxbills ... ... 99 Grebes, Notes on various species of... 102 Honeyeater, Garrulous 40 Honeysucker, Purple 41 Hornbill ... 163 Indigo Bunting ... ... 76 Jay ... 52 ,, Blue-bearded ... 122 „ Siberian ... 101 Red-headed Finch ... ... 35 Reviews : “ Notes on Cage -Birds ” ... 56 “ Captive Song-Birds ” ... 147 “ Foreign Bird Keeping ” ... 178 Rock Thrush ... ... ... 50 Roller, European ... 46, 182 Roller, Indian ... ... ... 64 Rose-coloured Pastor ... ... 40 Rufous-tailed Grassfinch ... 61, 96, 97, 100 Saudgrouse ... .. 73, 183 Seasonal change of plumage 41, 135 Siskin, American ... ... 125 Shamah ... 32, 132, 191 Song Sparrow, White-throated ... 181 Starling ... ... ... 117 Sugar-bird, Blue ... 113, 121, 138 ,, Yellow-winged ... 43 Swallows in Cages ... ... 22 Swan, Whooper ... ... ... 75 Syta/is arveusts... ... ... 79 Tauagers, Food for ... 37, 39, 76 ,. Songs of ... ... 33 Tortoise ... ... 152, 194 Toucans ... ... ... 85 Touraco ... ... ... 163 Travelling-cages for Doves ... 99 Lark, The Black Long-tailed Combasou ,, Grassfinch ... 169 39, 59, 71 ... 182 Macaw Madagascar Weaver Magazine, The ... ... 136 35, 57, 75- 77 14c, 152 Virginian Cardinal ... ... 2, 5 Waterfowl Waxbill, Common or Grey Wax wing Weavers Weaver Bird YVhydah, Resplendent 73, 136, 191 37, 38 ... 119 60, 78, 181 59, 7i