Records from Toronto. E . E. T. Seton, Evening Grosbeak. Hesperiphona vespertina. — The Rev. John Doel, of Toronto, showed me a fine female specimen of this rare bird, taken at Toronto on Christmas day ,*1854- Mr. Doel observed a flock of five or six feeding on the berries of the mountain ash, on Yonge Street. Two of these he secured, but one was too much mangled to be kept. About Christmas, 1870, he observed another small flock but failed to secure any. Auk, 2, Oct., 1885, p.834 Occurrence of the Evening Grosbeak ( Coccothraustcs vesftcrtina') at Toronto, Canada. — On the afternoon of April 2, Dr. J. E. White, of this city, informed me that he had that morning discovered a flock of over thirty Evening Grosbeaks feeding near the northern boundary of the city. The announcement was very surprising, but all doubts were dispelled by the production of a female specimen that he had secured. We went at once to the place, with a view to procuring additional specimens, but the flock had departed, and were no more seen. A resident of the neighbor- hood informed us that they had continued about this locality for over a week. This is the fifth record of the species in Ontario.— Ernest E. Thomp- son, Torojito , Canada. Auk, 4, July 1887. p. Editor Forest and Stream: I am very much interested in the notes published in Forest and Stream on the occurrence of the evening grosbeak ( Ooceothraustes vespertinus). My attention has been drawn to its occurrence here by Mr. Caulfield, taxi- dermist. One specimen was shot in this city the latter end of last month, and four were shot at Laprairie on the south side of St. Lawrence River, about nine miles above Montreal, last week. I saw two of these birds after they were stuffed. This is the first record of their occurrence in this district. Ernest D. W intle. Montreal, Feb. 20 . The Evening Grosbeak at Montreal. — Mr. William Brewster in a note to ‘Forest and Stream,’ Feb. 6, 1890, records the occurrence of the Even- ing Grosbeak ( Coccothraustes vespertina) in eastern New Hampshire and • Massachusetts, and Dr. A. K. Fisher of Washington, D. C., also Mr. J. Alden Loring of Oswego, N. Y., and Mr. J. L. Davison of Lockport, N. Y., records its occurrence in New York State, between the dates of Dec. 14, 1889, and Feb. 1, 1890. My attention was drawn to its occurrence here by Mr. Caulfield, taxidermist, one having been shot in this city by Mr. John H. R. Molson’s gardener in the last week in January, 1890, and four at Laprairie, on the south side of the St. Lawrence River about nine miles above Montreal, on Feb. 5. I saw two of these birds after they were stuffed. I believe this is the first record of their occurrence in this district. — Ernest D. Wintle. Montreal , Canada. Auk, VII. April, I 860 . p. Evening Grosbeak in Central Ontario. — The un- looked for appearance of the evening grosbeak in considerable numbers in the vicinity of Kingston, „ Ontario, has created quite an excitement among the local lovers of bird life. It was some time before they could J, I be identified, as they have never been seen so far east as oAlhis before. It is supposed they were driven here by < ? some of the heavy gales we have had this winter. They j-are met with feeding on the berries of the red 'cedar and £ seeds of the black ash. We have also with us this winter ^ j the pine grosbeak, white-winged crossbill and pine finch, ■ * all of which are irregular winter visitors in this locality. Y The great gray owl and snowy owl are also more common ^ than have been known for a number of years. The *• winter so far has been very mild.— John Ewart (Yarker, Ont. , Jan. 17 ). [The occurrence of this species in Ontario, though unusual, is not without precedent.] 1866. Evening Grosbeak in Central Ontario. By John Ewart. Ibid., P . 45. For, & Stream, Yol» 34 < • if+t. li- /..Mb i 8 S 4 - Evening Grosbeaks in Ontario. By Ernest E. Thompson. Sunny So.Oologist.i 5 ° 4 - The Evening Grosbeak. By F. A. Patton. Ibid., pp. 31-32.AUIC, VII. Jan.fiMfW. Evening and Pine Grosbeaks in Ontario. * — Large and numerous flocks of these two'Species ( Coccothraustes vesfiertina and Pinicola enucleator) have appeared this year in the Province of Ontario. They are reported from Kingston, Toronto, southern Peel Co., and Hamilton; no doubt more ex- tended observation would show a universal distribution at least along the northern shore of Lake Ontario. The first comers of this migration were observed about New Year’s Day, and since then large numbers of both species have been reported from all points under observation. Some- times the species are in separate flocks, and sometimes together. When not associated with the Pine Grosbeaks, the Evening Grosbeaks have usually been observed on the ground, where their actions are much like those of the Pifiilo erythropkthalmus; the food that they find there is seeds of maple ( Acer saccharinumf) , stones of choke cherry, and common ed haws; these latter are found in their stomachs all crushed, no doubt, by the powerful mandibles of the birds. The Pine Grosbeaks are usually seen feeding on the berries of the mountain-ash, and the crops and gizzards of many that have been shot have been found crammed with the seeds of the black ash, divested of the outer covering in most cases. This migration is so great and so unusual that all the papers have had notices of it, and every one about here who makes any pretention to being a naturalist has added numerous examples of both species to his collection. It is interesting to note that last winter there were no records here for the Evening and but one or two for the Pine Grosbeaks; the winter was a severe one, while this is unusually mild so far (Jan. 27), so it seems as if the abundant food supply, rather than any climatic conditions directly, might have had to do with the migration. — Ernest E. Thompson, Toronto , Out. Auk, VII. April, 1800. p 211 *For further records of the eastward movement of Evening Grosbeaks during the past winter see the following: ‘Forest and Stream’, Vol. XXIV, Feb. 6, 1890, pp. 44, 45; Feb. 13, pp. 64,65; Feb. 27, pp. 103 104; March 6, p. 123; March 13, p. 143; March 20, p. 167; March 27, p. 187. — ‘Ornithologist gnd Oologist’, Vol. XV, No, 2, Feb., 1S90, pp. 27-28; No, 3, March, 1890, p. 46. ?7t‘ w . shortly afterwards, while passing through a swamp of mixed timber my companion had wing-tipped a Nuthatch, and was floundering through the deep snow in pursuit, when I saw him suddenly turn and fire in an opposite direction. In reply to the usual question, “What have you got?” the answer came back, “An Evening Grosbeak.” Leaving the horse in the tracks I found that such was really the case, but, under fear of missing so rare a chance, he had fired too close and almost destroyed it. The call of another was still heard among the tree-tops, and in a few minutes I saw an Evening Grosbeak alive for the first time. I can’t say my hand was quite steady, but I brought him down, with outstretched, quivering wings, with a single pellet through his head, — a bad place for a bird to be hit that is wanted for preservation, but in this case a little extra care was all that was needed to make a good mounted specimen. Both were young birds in the plumage of the female, and seemed as if hardly recovered from the first moult. In the month of May, 1863, a few specimens were obtained near Woodstock, and again in May, 1871, I got three which were shot near London, but these are all I have ever heard of being found in Canada ; and from the list of birds recently published by Messrs. Saunders and Morden of London, these dilligent col- lectors do not seem to have met with this species, which may be regarded as purely accidental here. 3 2 Auk, II, 1885, 334. 3 Transactions Canadian Institute, III, 1891-92, 88. 4 Canadian Journal, III, 1854-55, 287. 5 Transactions Canadian Institute, III, 1891-92, 88; 1883, 146; Auk, IV, 1887, 256; Auk, V, 1888, 208. 6 Transactions Canadian Institute, III, 1891-92, 76-89. Nuttall Bulletin, VIII, / I, ftHsi , y -o^, /ho 7, 188. Hesperiphona vespertina. Evening Grosbeak. — Winter mi- grant of irregular occurrence. A flight in the winter of 1854-55 in southern Ontario is the earliest recorded; birds were taken at Toronto on December 25, 2 at Hamilton in the following April, 3 and at Woodstock on May 7, 1855. 4 Other small flights are recorded elsewhere, 5 but the great flight was in the winter of 1889-90; the first birds were recorded at Toronto on January 18, and the last on May 26; a very full report was published at the time by a committee of ornithologists; 6 they had information of 453 specimens in the hands of individuals, and estimated that not less than 1000 grosbeaks were slaughtered. Specimens have been taken since then, in March, 1897 and in January and March, 1902. Brewer, Me. 1890. A^Tnale Evening Grossbeak was taken alive here a feiAT days It was A in companyhwith Ehglish Sparrows and allowed a. be chopped over it. It had been killed before I saw it. 7 Letter of Manly Hardy, April 9 Brewer, Me The Evening Grosbeak was taken the 25th in Brewer. It a man to drop a bag over it. He stated to Mr, Crosi^y that . x busy eating an English Sparrow.— Letter of Manly Hardy. AT OKONO, MAINE. On the morning of February 28tli, while passing not far from a river, my attention was attracted by the note of a bird which seemed to come from the opposite side of the river. I imitated the sound, and soon a bird flew across the river, and lit in a tree quite near me. I recognized it as a beautiful male Evening Grosbeak. I think this is the first appearance of this bird in this state. Robert II. Fernald. XtCJn&i JlS-30 ,/*. ^6. Hoccot, hr antes ve snort ina . A fine ad. male in Greene Smith collection is labelled "Maine, from J. G. Bell". (No. 1015, no date). The Evening Grosbeak at Portland, Maine. — I found seven Even- ing Grosbeaks (Iiesperiphona vespertina vespertina), representing both sexes, in the Western Cemetery, Portland, early in the afternoon of April 16, 1914. It was a wintry day, and snow was falling at the time, with several inches of a fresh deposit on the ground. The birds were feeding on sumac fruit. They were easily approached but moved about with a pecu- liar abrupt activity, calling frequently and loudly. Though the Evening Grosbeak is no longer a stranger in Maine, its occurrences have not been so frequent that another is without interest; and the middle of April appears to be a rather late date for it. Nathan Clifford Bkown, Portland, Maine. ago . to allowed t was S' 7- : ’ ' ~ r/' -a t5 - ■ /’ ■■ y J M-« • *> 0 Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina. Evening Grosbeak. — 1909, a flock numbering between 30 and 40 remained in and about the village for about 3 weeks — were first seen April 1, last seen April 18. 1911. A flock of 5 were first seen March 27, and were seen three or four times for a week. 1913. A flock of 25 or 30 were first seen January 1, and have been seen many times by many observers on different dates — were last seen by myself April 20. Alllg 3.0. nly. 1913. p„ l} 3 7, DIVISION OF U. S. Department of dgnciiltnve. AND MAMMALOGY. QDm/iingtcn, < X). ( 2 ., VO ^ • - 3.0 i/C -9* /*-/ f (fo, u^t^j p^tj) <\J^,t~ L <--1 P^-X, ' ‘ -"V^-^ [y ‘ Z^/ 7 '^ 'X cV Z ^ t'Zv-^x p£~’ £P*-\ ZZ^P — cZ^zZcZZ, ^Zpp Q- e«.£&. *c ^ ^ JU . & A^ yi^^yjPZZCZZZZ $ 7^fc /t^trt^ sl*s^lsC^, £^*X, ■ Z^"/ ^V"!^/ J'’^~\-'7 {g * ^ . -t o-v f~T- -V. ./^ ^ ^ / . // CC/ s T hn^, fj/^y /'TCz^a^C^ « U^t_j_ y c 7*( ^^u^yfcy ■ jsi^^u7 /IX X^o/X : /r ''/tx? y^^yfr^^r trfL .-cm, t'tuv'W- /VW-t^ 'CoQ< /Ufisfitd • 7"X <4 lu^X-Cy fi \ oJCti.. fe'flfc. 2 W ^ „ - .<■ ^ sdt- ( , £ [jc ^US-iOCd ^ °t\) 'l^tX ‘ y^^rQ (d £ =^( 7 ^) ^lA^vo .trifpferi. ^ tis<- /7 oc 4 . , Lj . tO'ps'fddj rt^ . isiMc A lf /<-<*'- > oyjyirl^^' 1 ^U^yiy^ i^ t At *-^ Ci^y^y * 7 tt^. ; ^1 *•'{ ^ l'»-t'».V C ■f>-\^'- 2 X (*4 j . -TLi/c-O f < l/t^^ 7 i^-v^v- ^/ ; loi ^ — i — y^jo 5 (TrI £ /Tee. A>-wv~v-''v- ,^. , ^xi^u rt w £ 1 . /«i. / dtytfi CHSlSl-^d /L*lS-&-^ %-Lty%) ^/t \ulC‘L ft -/t V*.^ /U<> tti^x.C/ ^ f /<* X l y £iid • c J J T’-Ax/'^ ('x-'V'V. tX-w-v- iX t t-wc« 'W/ 2 AA>-,^ 4L- \£-0* { ) / t A4 T'r C'H ( . v \ ‘‘W ftd s ^ x l~G'G^<-liZ O '^V GOst lcd^ JB- /ti-t V-t-ci ~ti^ i jd^7do\ _' <£< 7 s< 7} 7 /n /{ . f\C\.L« fi. 1 "fit, ! , \*'i.‘*y //({ f^ddtxi f’l\Xj " \jOsi^ < 5 *-'^ Xl^ - Tjiry^l^ ^ yuud(J J M^Vv^, XfcjL^y ylA/^^ ^Cz.'ty -Ult K^ATMy, ^ ] ‘tX^-O'L . *■ ^ / ^/t- / (Q/iri du^y £ \a,x*f CAy>yd J , 7 ^M < 1 - / ^' / /l ^f. — . -£l^ /■ > •' ^ ^ X/r /*» _-*^jsifv_ _tt>^-e£v 'f°- 70 . ^ . 3 a, /Oi\~ . ’ -yx*Jy^~ U*~— c£>-j~ 4 - — -j ^ ~Uu (u*<^J^~ -^ 2 . / l * /L ~-<- /U u ~ U/ * ^occ^ _ **~csL- £*+~- * 4 ~" , TtC*. c ^ ~tt<~ J tA^Ur^CmyTL^ \ ^) >(j-^u^/$ . (£U Jc£jl. G^ i^'wSxCT. °-*0 ^ ”^2 *^L~^^~*--e>^_. £> £t/* ~&0jL ■dLcnf^ ^\nAS^/\ — (a^ct^A-^ twi ^tJijL 0 l5 db^CK/^cl^. — b*er\AS\J?^ *-''- sWLAaS --$AJ\sV^_^ /KU^^T ( S*— «t/n/"" ex_ -^i yvc^! ck$a_sg^*A_ ^ ~A^Z* tsIJZxyQ Slr-u~v^ OX^t/'f t o^O ^C$^er\-\.-^J?s\ JlXZ. iAsrr^-JLe>(^_ / l j -•'l/H^'Vl ^v\ yS~^~ C\_ , (£L 9-*/ •a^as^s^^ . C*__ sT/L/Cs^s\sv^0) r/ ^>'\^'^ scyi/ j_, syyv(_ (Z^w^L&ufl e^'V'UC- ;-^g r .. [jhAJlLi ^ / ‘hfr;.,'hul. 5" © SL & asiflimi; JAMES P. MELZER. o o / //c / '/ cy//, m Sff ■^—€T\_ — ^Arvt; — /L/ ^J ^ £A/»X) C^. di .AySc^LA JL u wJt crx 3 jW\ , c/Eo E 7 tvr>^o ✓Zz-t/'L^ CVwu^- ,^^MV 1 / 1 -y£ji_ l /xx yxAX^_ „ / IaaAtxa. AtKj^ sfyy^o^^L/Oi ®<-^-C y{y^XAJ\, ~^a^AslA>(^ wyiyC^ ■Jy^A, dlstfjAs yw«At>(>ic ^ ^ - ^nyyg/Lo jJ&i o O'^^'-'-cd—- y t^'J.-> efT^\AJ\ 'Aaju-z> tsirrAyflu ^y(yyyyoJ^Ji__ ytfnAC 3 ^yyyJyJ-y '•in^cL- 1 4 L,\; ^frv^XL -yC^AL^ er^xA— €K_ 'UUX. (£X\rJL- y^yisvw-yxJ^JL 0 sfcyc\sj*. "'tsdi - ' "-TT*' % &; - t 7 fu£. r, 3 o JAMES P. MELZER. c/4i^A>y. of, f$. '/S’f yytA. PoJk. «t tO, /Pp- j P J. a , „ . , , - O f o,, Jy n - - (yiAM^xxZtA^vwiAX^ e A ,m *' . 1 1 o\yy^d— ery\jt_^ xfU y~y\siyy^/\ '-'~.,f^yp_, t / y^yyQ w^c« 5 v ^<>0 ixW^jC- -- ' 8 /Vv^l o --^-tyyy^odjL^ C*S-^rysG^O *^-^c«-A^£>j / ^^*r y f*^CPstr*y\ \y^y^/3Py^JjlO^ SC& C^h^eny-^x t A/~Oy^ c PPLjX. y£/~l/^soO} c*yy- ✓w,*- — J 3 txd_s eyy~Of Uy^y-y^O •ytfySk^fiLy ■ oKffL- -^Asxr<-y ~$r^Sssc>to UytS\Jt_ *y\yyy y\y<^y/^ yvxyylj^ -•'Q^yyc*y^JLy l yv\OOA y\yyu^fj\J^C>(^_^ C*— 't~ oO£. — o ^A/v'V^V. < 7 VX^ y^L^J^yysyAjyyJ) e *>0 3/Co 'XxCcrvxytfi^, ~MlysK*c^ y/f x5 JLLl oM~ 3 >C -0\xv^ n 0 ■c~\_ Xr-tXX ^ ~^°~ X ^/w c^_, g^J-Jju\ -^^m. ~%JIjsw\ l ^Xa— s\/v^gXjl 0 “C -^' lA -''^| ^X> t Xo ifVln . /'^n^L isir-tr^^sX—- SvxXXL ^d-*y>\ y^V^c^c/jl_^ j / L/l^bj (AMyt4Xl <■ — ^X__ . / v «-0 -^SV^AS£sO\ 0^0 ^W^" o*~~\ if ^ O ^XL^cr^Jb/--- ~JL*_ i^r^cn^yy 6 ^C^> -XjLyOJ\ o ^r" f h fy . fhul. S~, '^f#j ( ) >QjLaaaJ\A^cC-* ^ -yfi-LKJL-- — OWL- -^ClA-L, -f -t: 0\yv\^cd/J\, JV$vLnJL, /Aj~fr~,e JLrr^r\ crt zJhs i n (Mi/L^T'tf — £AMscrt__^, 0 .i^uu/, .'^ ^ y'cdjtyw/x ! ycdyv^t 7^>C-, and four January 9, one a very line male, two that we were able to determine as females, and two with female plumage, but I could not make out the sex. This is evidently a rare occurrence and I thought it might be of interest to you. There were four or five more in the flock that were ton Jamea P. Melzer. For notes on the Evening Grosbeak in New Hampshire see For . &Stream Vol.54, pp. 44-45 & 103-104. The Evening’ Grosbeak in New Hampshire. — We have with us here at this date (Jan. 2, 1911) a flock of eight Evening Grosbeaks. They have been here for a month, and have been seen every day on one of our back streets on a small ornamental tree which is covered with seeds on which t hey feed. I hey seem to make their headquarters in some pines near by. They come out to feed two or three times a day. 1 hey are very handsome and quite uniformly colored though there is a slight difference in shades. They are very tame and will not notice any- one that may be within a few feet of them and they have had many visitors as they are quite a curiosity in this vicinity as they are in any part of New England. — C. H. Storrs, Lebanon , N. H. Auk 34.Apr-Xen p Evening Grosbeaks in Vermont. — During the last few weeks, there has been around my house here, a flock of Evening Grosbeaks ( Coccotkraustes vespertina), consisting of about a dozen individuals, more than half males in the most brilliant plumage. They seem especially fond of the seeds still hanging on a box elder tree. — W. W. Cooke, Burlington , Vermont , Feb. 20, 1890. Auk, VII. April, 1800. p. 2/0 C. I. Goodale. M. A. Frazar. GOODALE & FRAZAR, And Dealers in Naturalists’ Supplies and Specimens. NO. 93 SUDBURY STREET, SEND STAMP FOR CATALOGUE. s X- s? yy yyyy ,/Xy/ yyyy y. yy^yyy^c^ ^yyz? yyz^z- y iz U. S. Treasurj 1 Depart m ent. (/£/ /Sr ?* %y> ^^y2y^ty . 4 /^2, 9 ) 44 * & 7 &2y-C ypv £7c 7^7 / /ft^PZ cf 'Ths^titr ' jl 7 a/~ jfuW- ,7<7/ Xy yy, 4 r c^2*^(jyyuuLj&-. au^yy £ 2 ^, e.^/^- c/ (w. « C 4 A£ . Jks- ^ //^ ^2 . ^. fi^>^ ty&t ‘^o_ 4 . ■^iSL-j yc^jO 2 c 1 ^) ^ •^txl^ at. Y t4 -* jrJ ' t ^ z ^ tt -^» (xt^Cj— //«- ~ «*- V ' - ^ ^ c c c ^^cJ^yy ^ oL^yy^ . < ^ J uj- { y^y r^Y -^Cl-<-JL«__ /•^L-*<\_Jt jC ^ ^-CX-O- ttTzZZ^ ■J-cO &_-*: 0^ (Z^. .Au c3 &^Ct0 4-< jz c^ J- o- ir I y ^ 9~d7 ?' f~Z*~3-4j ZjO^LJZSI- 4? a^l~cJ^y q J }£/C r i-VcxcJu?c/~ £?,_ lTP^TP rf ^- _j- ^tLt^ce^z- ~ '' i '#-'-? — c7& &-o . ae. f t.; o_>fc je-' aj£j-. C'-C >£.. YiJ*^. 7 s &J? 't-cc '(^'^7' < A L*--C-^^C4^X^ 4’^szt-^j' J '^S' ^ a-Lt AjT^-Z-exSZ- (Z~ ^a 7-*A~-C < l sbt^~ Tr'Z^^Y ^77 ^TcjiTl "‘^c.Ji^.- %ZrL~A r£-e~***ZS ^^5--«_a_- 6< -<^ " O-c 4^7^gJz_ . , 4~& 7) uTJ^Cj K-*rS 4~*7 j7. £eXr Urtjtf^ 6 aA^ 4- oulostC . %&-*~^ a. 6U Co Cct^-lytJt- ^C. C " OU udSLitsr/- c^e Cz^aJ^ CeSKJtXi &xy£e{_ t ^-C— <£-*"*— C4>,,ja,. Ca_^t „ Q^e^r-t^C^a^UL. •■'^2- - <^tio_4- *-*-*- <*- Caujjz,, 7is£je,6££x-^ £^cjEzeT oCl^c. JL<- eJ t^JL <£*_ ^x^_s -C&^j e^w /{ a -<®_ "IGzj ^f-*~S2_f. — yu T^rrC. XSKUL, h«. tj, /8^o t /C. # -^L«~of ft ( Ci-i^dL CXAjL. JYXLaju Apr< , 1904 , p . l/bl 3 V. 3 ^ W - Vi~. Feb. 6, 1890.] EVENING GROSBEAK IN NEW ENGLAND. Editor Forest and Stream: The evening grosbeak ( Coccothraustes vespertina) has at length won a place in the fauna of New England by appealing during January. 1890, at several different localities in eastern Massachuse tts and southern New Hampshire. As far as I am able to learn it was seen first at Milford. New Hampshire , where Mr. James P. Melzer shot a female on January 6. This specimen, Mr. Melzer writes me, was apparently a solitary bird. It alighted on a tree in the village and attracted his attention by its peculiar notes. It seemed alert and and restless, but he succeeded in shooting it before it could again take wing. Three days later a young man brought in another which he said was one of a flock of eight or ten that he had seen near the town. Mr. Melzer was too busy at the time to j go in pursuit of them, but the young man went back and secured three more. Of the four taken this day one was an adult male and one a female. The sex of the other I two could not be determined by dissection, but they are j apparently females. These birds were feeding in maples and the “crops” of those killed were “filled with the soft J inner portions of the maple buds.” Milford is in Hills- 1 borough county, eleven miles northwest of Nashua. On Jan. 9 — the very day, it will be observed, when these [ grosbeaks were last seen at Milford— a male was shot at Seabrook, Rockingham county, N. H . I heard of this specimen through Or. A. K. Fisher, who wrote me that it was in the possession of Mr. Alvah A. Eaton, of Sea- brook. The latter, in reply to a letter from me asking about his bird, at once sent me the skin, very generously insisting that I accept it as a gift for my collection. In addition, he was kind enough to furnish the following account of its capture: It was shot by a Mr. Brooks, who found it alone in an apple orchard about half a mile from a large salt marsh, but only a few hundred yards from an arm or cove of this marsh. The locality is within a mile of the Massachusetts line, and hence in the extreme south- eastern corner of Seabrook. Mr. Eaton skinned and dis- sected the bird. Its stomach contained nothing but cherry stones, all of which were broken into fragments. As there were no wild cherries in the region about Sea- brook last summer, Mr. Eaton thinks that these stones may have been those of cherries from trees cultivated in a garden near the apple orchard where the grosbeak was killed. The bird was badly torn by the shot, “which must have been of large size,” and as the skin was very tender also, the specimen is not so good as could be wished; but it is in remarkably fine, richly-colored plum- age. I cannot see that it differs in any important respect from several of the western males in my collection. Mr. Eaton tells me that it measured “a trifle over 8in. in length.” The next point at which our interesting bird has been reported to me is Wellesley. Norfolk county, Massachu - setts . where, on the well-known Hunnewell place, near the outskirts of the village, a specimen was shot Jan. 15 by Mr. Thomas Smith, a gardener in Mr. Hunnewell’s service. Having a bent for natural history, Mr. Smith has made a small but interesting collection of such mam- mals, birds and insects as he has found time to capture and preserve. He shot the grosbeak in a maple, where it was sitting, apparently alone, uttering at intervals a call which resembles that of the pine grosbeak. By the aid of a copy of “Wilson’s Ornithology” lie identified it cor- rectly and mounted it. I am indebted to Mr. S. W. Den- ton for these facts, as well as for the specimen itself, which he obtained for me from Mr. Smith. Although the sex was not determined, the bird is evidently a female. It differs from all the western females in my collection in having the top and sides of the head deep, nearly pure ashy, instead of olivaceous brown. It is further peculiar in almost wholly lacking the usual blackish stripes on the sides of the throat. The last capture of which I have any present knowledge is that of a female, taken Jan. 25, at Lynn, Essex county , Massachusetts . It was killed by a young man who shoots for Mr. N. Vickary, the well known taxidermist, who says it was accompanied by another bird of apparently the same species and sex, which, at the report of the gun, rose high in air and made off, uttering as it flew a loud whistling call and occasionally a chattering cry also. When first seen they were sitting close together in the top of a red cedar, feeding on the berries. The gullet of the one killed proved to be full of the berries of this cedar. Mr. Vickary mounted the specimen, which will probably go to the Peabody Academy at Salem for the Essex county collection. I have examined this bird and find that it differs from my Wellesley specimen only in having the head of a slightly browner shade and the dark spots on the sides of the throat a little more distinct. The evening grosbeak has occurred in New York, in Onondaga county (Coues, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VII., 1882, 250), near New York city (Lawrence, Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist., N. Y., VIII., 1866, 289) and at Elizabethtown, Essex county (Brewer, Proc. Bos. Soc. Nat. Hist., XVII., 1875, 451), only ten miles west of Lake Champlain. Although several writers have confidently predicted its appearance in New England, the birds just mentioned are the first that have ever been reported. The fact that so many have been seen within less than three weeks and at places some distance apart makes it highly probable that they have crossed our borders in considerable num- bers, and it will be surprising if more are not found be- fore the winter is over. It would be interesting to know if the recent heavy snowfalls in the Northwest have had anything to do with their coming. Wi, Brewster. Cambridge, Mass. //,//, ;. : o. v /&Zaz bj / v!ff~ I* ' r c. 'Jfisy Coy# ftfiZs- 4 u*Ac, Z, tfVibCj^izz^ v tu. ats 7 {A sU^rstisds eilsc^. ^ t-. J g 2 stfiZe*£. tygd ALAA/tAg sgL. J/trtyUg. A? . C/ A ' S •<£> C. Cg^f^s ✓ «-' w V y * / ^ w ^ fl»~ 1K2. ./£-+--\ As® 7 JL^K ^ . ^4E*j— ^ X^ ~ ^ ~v^ — ’ __ ^ ^ < r - — t»_B. -» J^JL Tn ’ V*-,*--* < ^ f* *7 y *..< ^ *-•- ''• <5* ^ (St\f ~ L^ V ^4^7»=*^-i_._4=|. - _ :fVQm 1Ia 8 t ern Mass, M,A, Frazar. The most notable occurrence of the season, however, was the remarkable flight of evening grosbeaks which took place. The first to come , V our notice were the three birds noted by Mr. Brewster in the Forest and Stream of Feb. 27. The next were three fine males taken at Ayer Junction, Mass., on Feb. 20. They were killed from a flock of about seventy-five that had been hanging about the center of the town for a number of days. The little chap who killed these called the flock down on to the ground in his yard like sparrows by throwing canary seed for them to eat, and getting within 15ft. of the flock killed the three with his spring gun, shooting a few pellets of B shot. On Feb. 25 a correspondent, F. W. Deering, of Tops- field, Mass., killed two males that were feeding alone be- neath some maple trees, and he also mentioned a friend of his killing two others out of aflook of eight, about two weeks previously. On March 10 a male and female, killed at Reading, Mass., that morning, were brought in; they were alone and were feeding upon maple seeds. Upon our writing at once to the party who sent them in to be on the watch for more, we received another pair from him the next day, killed at the same place and under the same circum- stances. On March 15 a female taken at Melrose was brought in, and it was the last specimen of its species that we have heard of from this vicinity. Our friend Arthur Smith recently mounted one that was killed in West Newton, Mass. , during February, and besides the above specimens that were captured, we have reliable accounts from at least a half dozen more that were seen by careful ob- servers. Considering that it is a bird which would be easily overlooked, and coming as they did at a season of the year when comparatively few gunners are about, it is probably no exaggeration to say that eastern Mass- achusetts must have been visited by thousands of indi- viduals, Besides the above we have received a nice male and female taken by a correspondent at Heath, Ulster county, N. Y., who writes that he has taken nine others and seen quite a number besides. The stomachs of all ! the birds we dissected contained maple seeds, excepting of course the three that were being baited with canary seed. For, & Stem, April 24, I8C0. p.208 /tfc /%»• IjU ' ^ ^ fc. A - /- Aa Coccothraustes vespertina in Taunton, Massachusetts. — On March S, 1890, as I was walking out of my door I heard the notes of a bird strange to me but which at first I took to be those of the Pine Grosbeak. Getting my gun and coming out into the yard I found three Evening Grosbeaks feeding on the buds of a maple tree. In the course of a few minutes I had two fine males and a female laid out on my skinning table. This is I think the first record for Bristol County. — A. C. Bent, Taun- ton . 1 Mass. Aliki YU. July, 1890, p, A Vot. 'it/. /fc*7 1887. Evening Grosbeak in Massachusetts. By E. H. Forbush. /iJ?. or » & Stt©aSl« 2 / H. L. Clark of Amherst received, January 8, a line specimen of the evening Grosbeak shot in South Amherst. He says this is the first instance on record of this bird being found in New England. Is that a fact? G. W. Jackson. It gives me pleasure to record the capture of j an adult female Evening Grosbeak (Hespero- phona vespertina) in Wellesley, Mass., January j 15, 1890, by Mr. Thomas Smith, a gardener in the employ of Mr. H. II. Hnnnewell. This bird was shot from a maple tree on the estate of Mr. K. G. Shaw about nine o’clock in the morning, and was the only one seen that day, although Air. Smith is quite positive he saw one ( possibly this same bird) a few days previously and describes the note, though dis- tinct, as being quite similar to that of the Pine Grosbeak (Pinicola enucleator). So far as I can learn and I have the authority of Air. William Brewster, this is the first spec- imen of this species recorded, as having been taken, not only in Alassachusetts but even in New England. Shelley W. Denton. Have you ever known of the Evening Gros- beak being taken in Massachusetts? I got a fine male shot here last Wednesday, January 22. N. Vickary. Lynn, Mass. Evening Grosbeak at West Pelham, Alass., January 24. q Paul S. Roberts. b.v o.,XK The Evening Grosbeaks. Is this the Earliest Record? Editor of O. & 0.: You wished me to let you know the exact date my Evening Grosbeaks were shot. I shot three on the first day of January and two were shot by Air. Clifford Burr the next day. They were all shot on maple trees. They were seen around here a day or two before they i were shot. John Gouldimj. So. Sudbury, Mass., April 21, 1890. . 0,VO. fi V. , t'& jO.h V Seven Evening Grosbeaks were taken at So. Natick (1 mile from the Wellesley locality). They were very tame, flying only a short dis- tance at the report of a gun, and were engaged in feeding upon maple buds. A. P. Morse. March 11, 1890. Two Evening Grosbeaks, $ and $? , taken March 3, 1890, at Alaple St., West Roxbury, district, Boston, Alass., by Arthur L. Reagli. Both birds were seen and one shot. The other came back in about twenty minutes and was secured. O.e.; O, XV, Mar. 1890 P tf Evening Grosbeaks Again Seen. TN MASSACHUSETTS. Air. L. W. Newell reports that he has in his possession for mounting two Evening Gros- beaks, taken from a large flock at Reading, Alass., on April T, 1890, by Air. Chas. A. Loring, ; manager of the N. E. Newspaper Union. Our northern visitors are making us a prolonged visit. 0. VO-, XV? /> Coccothraustes vespertina at Amherst, Massachusetts. — On January 8, 1890, I was visited by a farmer from the southern part of Amherst, who had with him a bird he desired me to name for him. I recognized it at once as a male Coccothraustes vespertina in fine adult plumage. The man said his boy had shot it a day or two before as it was perched on the top of a cherry tree near his house. There were two together but the other escaped. The one that he shot he said was singing finely at the time, and seemed much brighter colored than the other. We have had very mild weather this year and no snow at all. I had no difficulty in obtaining a good skin, and soon it will grace the collection of Amherst birds in the Amherst College cabinet. — -Hubert L. Clark, Amherst , Mass. Auk, VII. April, 1890. p. 3./0 Evening Grosbeaks in Hampden County, Massachusetts. — A few days since Mr. Rufus E. Bond brought into the Museum of the Worcester Nat- ural History Society an Evening Grosbeak which was killed by Mr. Louis James in East Brimfield, Mass., on February i. Neither of these gentle- men knew the bird, but thinking it might be something of interest to the Museum Mr. Bond, who is a member of the school board of Fishdale, at once brought it to us. A small flock of the birds, perhaps a dozen in all, bad been seen about the house for several days. The bird is an adult male in fine plumage. I have preserved it for our collection. Some of the cyclonic storms of the past month have been followed by strong west winds. This may account for the presence of the birds so far to the east of their usual habitat. — E. II. Forbush, Worcester , Alass. A«k,TII. A#ril, 1880. p. HO. 22 IN MASSACHUSETTS. H. L. Clark of Amherst received, January 8, a fine specimen of the evening Grosbeak shot in South Amherst. He says this is the first instance on record of this bird being found in New England. Is that a fact? G. W. Jackson. It gives me pleasure to record the capture of j an adult female Evening Grosbeak ( Hespero - phona vespertina) in Wellesley, Mass., January 15, 1890, by Mr. Thomas Smith, a gardener in the employ of Mr. H. H. Hunnewell. This bird was shot from a maple tree on the estate of Mr. R. G. Shaw about nine o’clock in the morning, and was the only one seen that day, although Mr. Smith is quite positive he saw one ( possibly this same bird) a few days previously and describes the note, though dis- tinct, as being quite similar to that of the Pine Grosbeak ( Pinicola enucleator). So far as I can learn and I have the authority of Mr. William Brewster, this is the first spec- imen of this species recorded, as having been taken, not only in Massachusetts but even in New England. Shelley W. Denton. Have you ever known of the Evening Gros- beak being taken in Massachusetts? I got a fine male shot here last Wednesday, January 22. JV. Vickary. Lynn, Mass. Evening Grosbeak. at West Pelham, Mass. January 24. o Paul 8. Roberts. o.v 0-,W, />■ The Evening Grosbeaks. Is this the Earliest Record ? IN MASSACHUSETTS. Editor of O. & O. : You wished me to let you know the exact date my Evening Grosbeaks were shot. I shot three on the first day of January and two were shot by Mr. Clifford Burr the next day. They were all shot on maple trees. They were seen around here a day or two before they were shot. John Goulding. So. Sudbury, Mass., April 21, 1890. . O.yo. X V. y»*y . iS jg.fr- 7f. IN MASSACHUSETTS. Seven Evening Grosbeaks were taken at So. Natick (1 mile from the Wellesley locality). They were very tame, flying only a short dis- tance at the report of a gun, and were engaged in feeding upon maple buds. A. P. Morse. March 11, 18'JO. Two Evening Grosbeaks, $ and £ , taken March 3, 1890, at Maple St., West Roxbury, district, Boston, Mass., by Arthur L. Reagli. Both birds were seen and one shot. The other came back in about twenty minutes and was secured. Tar. 100 : ; Evening Grosbeaks Again Seen. IN MASSACHUSETTS. Mr. L. W. Newell reports that he has in his possession for mounting two Evening Gros- beaks, taken from a large flock at Reading, i Mass., on April 7, 1890, by Mr. Chas. A. Boring, ; manager of the N. E. Newspaper Union. Our northern visitors are making us a prolonged visit. o*o.,xv; /> ??' Coccothraustes vespertina at Amherst, Massachusetts. — On January 8. 1890, I was visited by a farmer from the southern part of Amherst, who had with him a bird he desired me to name for him. I recognized it at once as a male Coccothraustes vespertina in fine adult plumage. The man said his boy had shot it a day or two before as it was perched on the top of a cherry tree near his house. There were two together but the other . escaped. The one that he shot he said was singingfinely at the time, and seemed much brighter colored than the other. We have had very mild weather this year and no snow at all. I had no difficulty in obtaining a good skin, and soon it will grace the collection of Amherst birds in the Amherst College cabinet. — Hubert L. Clark, Amherst , Mass. Auk.VII.April.lSBO.p. 2/0 Evening Grosbeaks in Hampden County, Massachusetts. — A few days since Mr. Rufus E. Bond brought into the Museum of the Worcester Nat- ural History Society an Evening Grosbeak which was killed by Mr. Louis James in East Brimfield, Mass., on February i. Neither of these gentle- men knew the bird, but thinking it might be something of interest to the Museum Mr. Bond, who is a member of the school board of Fishdale, at once brought it to us. A small flock of the birds, perhaps a dozen in all, had been seen about the house for several days. The bird is an adult male in fine plumage. I have preserved it for our collection. Some of the cyclonic storms of the past month have been followed by strong west winds. This may account for the presence of the birds so far to the east of their usual habitat. — E. H. Forbush, Worcester , Mass. Amk.TII.A#riI,1880.p. X /O. t. aJ 9\^ •A<_ c ~ jCi_ O l T'C^f— (TW^ iV c - -^~ ■ 2- <-f / ^ f J fl Bla , C , k - backed Three-toed Woodpecker and Evening Grosbeak at Well- f a h SS ’ the vicinit T of Wellfleet, CapeTOT^ter 5. 1 killed in Mr W'n Three - t0ed Wood P ecker (Picoides arcticus), which is now M,. Will .am Brewster’s collection, and saw an Evening Grosbeak (Mesferifikona vespertine). The Grosbeak was in the open near one or waTa st l- aW U Cl ° Se en ° Ugh t0 be sure of the identification It was a striking looking bird and could have been nothing else Assuming- ' 7“ the T Same individuaI a11 t ime , it was ver 7 1oath to leave the Ti 7 ' . thOUght 11 had left ’ alld departed myself, but came back later TJJT i h : S T t 1 . S ' 10t 3t U — times, but unfortunately did not ecu e it The white wing patches were perhaps its most striking feature MaT ( w h,, Ue^agreat deab - Jon, ^ Nichols, ajjs, XXI, Jan., 1904, p, S The Evening Grosbeak at Beverly, Mass.— In the winter of 1889-1890 there was a great incursion of the Evening Grosbeak ( Hesperiphona vespertine) to Massachusetts, a number of specimens being taken at Box- ford and Lynn. This was considered the most interesting flight of birds, ever recorded in the State. Most of the specimens secured were placed in the Peabody Academy of Science at Salem. I believe the species has not been seen since then until Wednesday, March 23, 1904, when I came upon a flock of five of them. They were in a willow tree along with, some Robins and Rusty Grackles. The Robins and Grackles flew when I passed under the tree, but these birds remained, and to my surprise I discovered that they were the Evening Grosbeak. They were much scattered, and I fired at one old male which I secured. They flew perhaps an eighth of a mile before alighting again. I followed and secured two more, a young male and a female. They were all fine birds, in good condition, and their stomachs were well filled with buds and seed. They have been purchased by Mr. John E. Thayer of Lancaster, Mass. ; two of them will be placed in the collection of the Boston Society of Natural History and the other retained for his own collection. — C. Emerson Brown, Beverly, Mass. Aufc, X ..1, July, 1904, p. Evening Grosbeaks again in Massachusetts. — Mr. M. Abbott Frazar has kindly given me permission to report the fact that, on the morning of February 7, 1909, he met with a small flock of Evening Grosbeaks at Townsend, Massachusetts. He was returning from a walk when he started the birds from the ground where they had been feeding on the fallen fruit of a rock maple that stands within twenty feet of the front steps of his farm house. They flew across the road to a smaller maple in which they alighted and remained for several minutes, allowing him to approach them closely and to obtain a good view of them. There were about ten of them, all in the plumage of the female. Their next flight was to the top of a tall pine some two hundred yards further off. Here they stayed a somewhat shorter time, before taking wing again, to disappear in the far distance. Mr. Frazar had been away from Townsend for four days before the date above mentioned. He was told that during his absence the Grosbeaks had been seen repeatedly by a man who works on his place. They have not since returned to it as far as he can learn. He was constantly on the watch for them during the remainder of his stay at Townsend, which terminated on the morning of February 11, when he came back to Boston. Not long after this he received and forwarded to me two letters written by a man liv- ing in South Sudbury, Massachusetts, who claims that his “door yard” was visited on February 14th, and again on the 15th, 1909, by three Even- ing Grosbeaks, two of which were males. If I remember rightly, Evening Grosbeaks are known to have occurred in eastern Massachusetts on but two occasions prior to these; in 1890 when they appeared in considerable numbers, at many different localities, in January, February, and March; and on March 23, 1904, when five were found together in Beverly and three of them killed, by Mr. C. E. Brown. 1 — William Brewster, Cambridge, Mass. 1 Auk, Vol. XXI, July, 1904, p. 385. > 26, Apr-1909, p, ! The Evening Grosbeak at Boston, Mass.— On December 5, 1910, two Evening Grosbeaks (Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina ) were seen in Olmsted Park beside Leverett Pond in a birch tree. It was at this pre- cise point in the park that the Orange-crowned Warbler and the Blue- grey Gnatcatcher had been seen two days previous, of which another general note furnishes the record. Neither bird was in the plumage of the adult male. One showed but a bit of yellowish color on the nape of the neck. The other was somewhat more yellowish. Both birds had a black tail tipped with white and the black upper tail-coverts also tipped with white. The bills of both were horn-color. The more yellowish bird, quite probably a young male, gave many clear whistles as he moved about in the birch, or dropped to the ground. The other bird, in the plumage of the female, responded with a slight chattering. The birds were viewed as near as fifteen feet. Both at length flew across the pond, where the young male’s whistles could still be heard. These birds were thus in Brook- line as well as Boston and crossed the waters on which the rare wild ducks wintered last season (Auk, October, 1910, pp. 390-408). Two other records of a single bird each, seen by other observers, have come to my knowledge, indicating that once more this far northwestern bird has appeared in eastern Massachusetts.— Horace W. Wright, Boston, Mass. Ask 2V, J*n 19UL,p. //^, /&, The Evening Grosbeak at Lancaster, Mass. — On Sunday, January- 15, 1911, as I was walking along the main street, I was attracted by a peculiar whistle, and looking around I saw three Evening Grosbeaks ( Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina ) light on the ground under some spruces, not twenty-five feet from where I stood. They were eating some kind of seeds. There was a male in fine bright plumage and two dull- colored birds, which I took to be females. These are the first Evening Grosbeaks I have ever seen in Lancaster, although they have been reported from the next Town (Leominster). — John E. Thayer, Lancaster, Mass. Attk 2 4 . Apr«J9H pt z 67 Evening Grosbeaks ( Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina) at Man- chester, N. H. — On March 6, 1913, at 8 o’clock a. m., I saw seven Evening Grosbeaks in front of the Woman’s Aid Home in Manchester, N . H. One was a brilliant male in full plumage, the others varying greatly . They were in a small mountain ash tree, sixteen feet from where I stood, but were not feeding while I watched them. Later in the morning I located them feeding in maple trees, about four blocks distant from the former location, one brilliant male and six others as before. I publish this note in the in- terest of the Manchester Institute of Arts and Sciences, other members of which have likewise observed grosbeaks recently . — Edwa rd H. Fogg, Manchester, N. H. Attic 30, July, 19IQ. P. Evening Grosbeaks at Jamaica Plain, Mass. — In the April number of 1 The Auk,’ Mr. Edward H. Atherton reports an Evening Grosbeak (Hes- periphona vespertina vespertina) in the Arnold Arboretum. The bird re- mained for about six weeks the last date of observation being February 8, 1914. This however was not the only appearance of this species in the Arbore- tum this season. On March 15, 1914, with Mr. Ralph M. Harrington of Cambridge, Mass., and the writer saw two fine males and one female in the river birches near the superintendent’s house where they were feeding on the seeds. The males were uttering low whistling notes. The female was much darker than the bird noted by Mr. Atherton. They were seen several times in about the same place for just a month (March 15- April 15). A number of times two males and one female were observed at Quincy, Mass., and on those identical dates the birds were not to be found in the Arboretum. Were they the same birds? The two places are only about eight miles apart. — Harold S. Barrett, Jamaica Plain, Mass. i. £>0*7, / 9 / 4 ” J'YsUl L l/J'llJ-j ,-a 7 '/ It A4’ '/ci'l v'S^7.y (':£$ iiyi/ytO ) J/ycxt^c- ^/- . (JyicMe^i/ J^iOj XAX\ V, Jw- /9/7„ -1'L. 9ZL-93, Evening Grosbeak ( Hesperiphona vespertina oespertina) at Springfield, Mass — For the last few years the Evening Grosbeak appears to >e a regular winter visitor to this region. If this bird is to continue to appear here during the colder months, it will be interesting to know when its coming and going may be expected. Last season in central Massachusetts its presence was first noted early in October, and the last one reported as seen here was upon May 18 .— Robert O. Morris, Springfield, Mass. .nTcJs- . xlk x. i y. lOrdk : (9t 7- jo, V7%- Greaaral Notes Coccothraustes vespertinus. — Recently, when examining the collection of birds made by Mr. H. E. Rich, of East Hampton, Conn, (nine miles east of Portland), I saw an adult male of the Evening Grosbeak which was killed in that vicinitv March 2, 1890. Mr. Rich informed me that there were twelve or fourteen in the flock, and that several Pine Grosbeaks were with them. The other Evening Grosbeaks reported from this State were taken at Portland, March 6, and Gaylordsville, March 10, of the same year, during the remarkable irruption of the species at that time. (‘Forest and Stream,’ XXXIV, March 27, 1890, 187; — Auk, VII, April, 1890, 2 1 1.) Auk X, April, 1803. p. 207. 1891. Evening Grosbeaks in Connecticut. By John H. Sage. Ibid., p. 187. S'oi's & Stream, Voi, 3-4 , The Evening Grosbeak in Connecticut. — A female Evening Grosbeak {Coccothraustes vesfertina ) was shot at Gaylordsville, Conn., March io, 1890, by Mr. E. H. Austin of that place, who kindly forwarded it to me. Mr. Austin writes that it was one of four or five that came near his house, and that one of them was very yellow, probably an adult male. Gaylordsville — a district of the town of New Milford — is on the Ilousatonic River, but a few miles from the New York State line. — C. K. Averill, Jr., Bridgeport , Conn. 3 .//- \ FLORIDA,110THOUBB muBBxivuflw, wv- I umiKAEB and TOMATOES, at ISAAC Locke & fa. oush. / 1 0 J J V- Awt JUdl / ItAji jfrlAX. TUI^j^ (yj~i/x£- 4A-^-*-J?£js\_ t' XAJ^ /r/^VC 2 ? <3 , (but^ fruAcL*^ ff^tfurO t /U jl£r^ Tvt. ifcu. M<- {Jy0ryuJL^ f U*£L jr ~a*^(L ^L y^y££j^ L^Y -fir' EVENING GROSBEAKS IN NEW YORK. I N the last issue of the Forest and Stream Mr. William Brewster has an interesting account of the occurrence of the evening grosbeak (Coccothrausies vesper tina) in eastern New Hampshire and Massachusetts'; in which he records the capture of a number of speciihens at various places throughout that section of the country. Thus the first introduction of the species to the fauna of New Eng- land is on positive record, and not on unsatisfactory or questionable data. In this particular New York is not so fortunate, for not until very recently has the evening- grosbeak an undeniable claim to a position among the birds of the State, although it has been enrolled as one of them for nearly twenty-five years. The writer has no knowledge of the existence of any New York State speci- mens which were captured prior to December. 1889, so it will be well before dwelling on these late captures to re- view briefly the status of the earlier ones. In 1866 Mr. Lawrence (Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist., VIII., 1866, 289) mentions the evening grosbeak, but as no local- ity is given the citation may refer to New Jersey, as the birds of a portion of that State are included in the list. The next record is by Dr. Brewer (Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., XVII., 1875, 451) of a specimen seen at Elizabeth- town, Essex county, by Rev. Dr. Cutting, in the winter of 1875. This record is very unsatisfactory, for the gentleman who observed the bird was presumably not an ornithologist, and hence mistaken in his identification. In 1882 Dr. Coues (Bull. Nutt. Ornith. Club, VII., 1882, 250) records a specimen which was seen near Marcellus, Onondaga county, on July 8 of that year, by a gentle- man while fly-fishing. It is safe to consider that this was a case of misidentifieation, as the time of year renders the bird’s occurrence as highly improbable. The late Chas. Lenden (Forest and Stream, XXVIII. ,1887, 367) mentions the capture of two specimens by a boy at Brant, Erie county, on April, 15, 1887. He identified the birds from portions of one of the specimens, so there can be no doubt as to the accuracy of this record. Mr. Edward Swift (Forest and Stream, XXIX., 1887, 383) records the capture of a specimen at Elmira, Che- mung county, on Nov. 25, 1887. The specimen was mounted, but destroyed by a cat the following day. This completes the published records for the State as far as known to the writer, and .taken as a whole they are very unsatisfactory. It is pleasure, therefore, that the writer is enabled to record the occurrence or capture of evening grosbeaks in various parts of the State during the present winter. On Jan. 8 the writer was surprised by receiving six specimens of evening grosbeaks from Lake George, Warren county, the gift of his friends, Messrs. Foster and Roy Lockhart. A letter from the former gentleman gave an account of their capture. Quite early on the morning of Jan. 6 nine individuals were seen on some maple trees in company with pine grosbeaks. Unfortunately, at the first discharge of the gun no specimens were secured, but they were decoyed back by imitating their shrill call and three secured. After this they would not allow themselves to be ap- proached, and finally disappeared. About noon of the same day four individuals were seen high in air flying south, but a few well-applied calls stopped their course and brought them down to the treetops, from where they were soon secured. One, a fine male, having its wing only slightly injured, was placed in a cage, where he soon recovered, making an attractive and interesting pet. Although the young men kept a sharp lookout no more specimens were seen until Jan. 23, when one female was secured, and on the 25th another captured. On Jan. 30 a flock of about a dozen was seen, but departed before any could be secured. The following day the caged specimen, acting as a call bird, brought a flock about the house, from which three females and one male was secured. By the actions of their pet the young men can tell in a moment when other birds are around. In a recent letter Mr. Lockhart mentions the occur- rence of a flock of grosbeaks at Bolton Landing, Warren county, on Jan. 24. Lake George is the most eastern locality in the State from which records have been received. From the west- ytwfCXVj ern and southern .portions of the State dome a consider- \ able number. Mr. J. L. Davison, of Lockport, Niagara county, in- forms me that a flock of seven evening grosbeaks were seen in the city Dec. 14 and 15, 1889, but none were secured. Mr. Geo. F. Guelf, of Brockport, Monroe county, se- cured a pair Dec. 30, 1889, and reports as seen another pair in company with five grosbeaks on the following day. On Jan. 29, 1890, another specimen, a female, was brought to him. Dr. W. H. Bergtold, of Buffalo, reports that nine were seen on Jan. 10, 1890, and on the following day a male and two females were captured. Mr. Louis A. Fuertes, of Ithaca, Tompkins county, se- cured a male and two females on Jan. 21, 1890, the only ones seen. Mr. A. H. Wood, of Painted Post, Steuben county, writes that he secured three evening grosbeaks, the first on Jan. 23, and the other two on Feb. 1, 1890. Mr. G. S. Miller, Jr. , writes that he received from Os- wego, Oswego county, four fine specimens shot from a flock of about ten birds, on Jan. 28. Mr. J. Alden Loring, of Owego, Tioga county, writes that a specimen was shot from a flock of about twenty, which were feeding among the maple trees. On Feb. 1 he saw three others, males. The above records are all that have come to the notice of the writer, but doubtless many others will soon appear from various parts of the State. A. K, Fisher, Washington, D. C., Feb. 8. IN NEW YORK. Editor of O. it O. : I have to add to the already long list of captures of the Evening Grosbeak a $ and 9 taken on April 21st, from a flock of five in hemlock woods. A. II. B. Jordan. Willsborough, Essex Co., N.Y., April 21, 1890. The Evening Grosbeaks are staying late, i Saw a flock of seven-females April 28th. A. II. B. Jordan. . XV, May. l S90,p.f/, Oneida County, New York, W illiam L, Ralph 8t JUgbert Base s Coccothraustes vespertina. — The unusual migration of this species dur- ing the past winter, brought a record to us as it did to many other localities in the State. On Feb. 9 , 1890 , Mr. James R. Benton of Clinton, N. Y. , saw a flock of four singing on a tree before his house, and had the good fortune to secure three of t hem , a male and two females, all of which have been preserved. Auk, VII. July, 1890, p, J.3 0 Saw one $, two 9, E veni ng G roshaa lrs. on the campus at Cornell University, on Dec. 5, 1890. The male was a beauty, and was singing or chattering loudly. Alvan H. Alberger. Qa&Oo XVI. Jan, l89i * p ' i& The Evening Grosbeak in New York.— Mr. Charles F. Earle writes me from Syracuse, N. Y., July nth, as follows: “On the 8th of the present month I saw a male Evening Grosbeak ( Hesfi e rofih ona ves-per- ' tina . ) near Marcellus Station, Onondaga County, N. Y. Being engaged in fly-fishing at the time, I was unable to secure the bird; but there is no question of the identification, as I had a good view of it at reasonably i close quarters.”— Elliott CoUESj Washington, D.C. Bull. N. O. O. 7, Oot, 1882, p. X W Coccothraustes vespertina in Erie County, N. Y. — On the 15th of April. 1SS7, Mr. B. W. Fenton of Buffalo shot a pair (male and female) of Even- ing Grosbeaks at Brant, Erie County, N. Y., and brought the male’s head to the late Charles Linden for identification. This observation was pub- lished by Prof. Linden in the ‘Forest and Stream,’ Vol. XXVIII, 1887, p. 367. This is, I believe, the first record from New York State which is backed by a specimen : the above-mentioned head is now in the collection of Mr. A, H. Alberger of Buffalo, and places the record beyond cavil. On Jan. 10, 1S90, Mr. D. W. Fenton observed a flock of nine Evening Grosbeaks in our City Park, and on the following day with his assistance I was able to secure three specimens, two females and one immature male. The birds were very tame, and were feeding on the seeds of the maple. On the 18th of January, 1890, Mr. Geo. Harris of West Seneca, Erie County, received a fine male of this species, which had been shot at West Seneca. He was informed that the bird was in full song on a low bush when shot, and that no more were seen at the time. These facts, excepting the Harris record, are also embodied in a report to ‘Forest and Stream’ (Vol. XXXIV, 1890, pp. 64, 65,) by Dr. A. K. Fisher. — W. H. Bergtold, M. D., Buffalo , N. T. ▲uk, VII. April, 1880. p. X6 1 - X / O r 333 - Evening Grosbeak near Buffalo. By Chas. Linden. Ibid. No 17, May 19, p. 367. For. & Stream, Vol. XXVIII 1375. Evening Grosbeak at Elmira , N. 2 ~. By Edward Swift. Ibid., No. 20, Dec. 8, p. 383. — A male taken Nov. 25.FOT. Ss Stream. Vol. 2 1899. Evening Grosbeak near Troy , N. T. By John A. Sampson. ibid., April 17, p. 247. ipQir, ftstrsam, Ve h 34 1870. Evening Grosbeak in Western New Tork. son. Ibid., p. 65. For, Ss Stream, voI s 3-2 , / 3. Coccothraustes vespertinus. Evening Grosbeak. — During the remarkable flight of these birds to the eastward in the winter of 1889-90, several were taken at different points about the county. The Evening Grosbeak in Central New York in April. — On April ii a neighbor described to me two birds which she had seen in the fruit trees in her yard so accurately that I had no doubt that she had seen a pair of Evening Grosbeaks ( Hesperiphona vespertina ). A later search failed to reveal them that day, however, but on the following day I was sent for, and on nearing the place heard their curious notes, and had no difficulty in finding the birds. They were quite tame, and I watched them for a long time. They spent most of the time on the ground or in the lower branches of the trees, and the male in particular seemed very partial to the shriveled and discolored apples that lay on the ground or clung to the branches. Whether he ate the pulp or the seeds I could not tell positively. In the winter of 1901-02 these birds were quite common here, but I have since had no report of them until the present instance, and I was sur- prised to see them here this year after the spring had broken and all the earlv birds were starting their nesting. — Louis Agassiz Fuertes,. Ithaca , N. Y. Auk, XXI, July, 1904, p . 3 SS~- [ N NEW YORK. This time at Ballston Spa, N.Y., where three (3) fine J specimens were seen by myself. It registered 27° above, and there were three inches of snow on the ground. When first seen they were picking up sand, etc., on a bare bit of ground, but soon took wing and alighted in a maple near, but before I could step into the house for my gun, had departed for parts unknown, thus foiling me in my attempt to secure a specimen. S. B. Ingeraoll. March 30. IN .JORDAN, ONONDAGA CO., N.Y. On February 11th, while in Jordan, N.Y., a peculiar looking bird flew and lit almost over my head. A second glance showed to me that it was a 9 Evening Grosbeak. I sent a boy after a shot-gun and I watched the bird. She seemed very tame, as I stood within twenty feet of her all the time the boy was gone. But luck was against me, and the boy could not get a gun, and 1 had to go and get the gun and leave the boy to watch the bird. Well, to make the story short, while I was after the gun, the buss with bells on their horses went lumbering along under my bird, bound for depot to meet the next train, and my bird, the boy said, “took a sneak towards the other side of (the village) Jordan” ; and in a diligent search of three hours I failed to discover her. But as there are plenty of large Norway spruce and other evergreen trees in the village, a bird of that size and their habits, during the middle of the day, would have been easily overlooked. [ have skins in my cabinet of $ and 9 of this species, and am positive as to the identity. E. G. Tabor. Meridian, N.Y. 0.v-a,waf t . t /rfa t /, yf. The Evening Grosbeak Comes East. XK iify ( / • V- In the Boston Transcript of January 30, 1890, Mr. Frank A. Bates made the first public an- nouncement of the capture in New England, at four different places, of the Evening Grosbeak a bird hitherto never seen here, having re- ported the fact at the meeting of the Boston Scientific Society on the previous evening. We append detailed records as sent us. IN NEW' YORK. A male and two female Evening Grosbeaks were shot here yesterday, January 20. Alvan II. Alberger. Ithaca, X. Y. Editor Ornithologist and Oologist: While out for a walk Sunday morning, Feb- ruary 9, I had the remarkable good luck to see six Evening Grosbeaks, three males and three females. These birds were so very tame they allowed me to approach very near to them and gave me a splendid chance to study the color- ings and markings of this beautiful bird. The males were wonderfully brilliant, and the females were very much like their lords only their plumage was not so bright and were somewhat smaller in size. This is not the first time this winter this bird has been found in this locality. D. C. Swift. Silver Creek, N.Y. . . Q.&O. XV, Feb. 1890 p ‘ /a 3 THE EVENING GROSBEAK. Editor Forest and Stream: While making a professional visit one mile from the village on Feb. 14, my attention was called to the piping note of a strange laird" by a lady patient, with the request that I do something to keep it still, as it had annoyed her all the morning. On leaving the house I heard the sharp, shrill note repeated at intervals of about one minute, and saw a stranger sitting in a maple tree. After some delay I secured a gun and shot the bird. Great was my sur- prise when I picked it up to find I had secured a fine female evening grosbeak. The bird was evidently alone, as the lady who called my attention to it informed me that she had heard the bird since daylight, and it had been constantly piping its single note, until I came to the rescue about 11 A. M. A careful search failed to detect the presence of any other birds. I mounted the specimen, and it will hold a conspicuous place in my cabinet. This is the second instance of the capture of this bird in Che- mung county, as far as I know, the other one having been reported by Edward Swift, of Elmira, in December, 1887. J. W. Gee, M.D. Van Ettenville, N. Y., Feb. 15. 1869. Loring. Evening Grosbeak Ibid., pp. 64-65. in New York. By A. K. Fisher and J. Alden For, & Stream. Yol» 34, Fisher, A. K. Evening Grosbeaks in New York. (Forest & Stream, XXXIV, 1890, pp. 64, 65.) v«t.3v 'Mitmmi mmorn. ti-?a +?,to 3. L , ^ * THE EVENING GROSBEAK. Editor Forest and Stream: \ While making a professional visit one mile from the | tillage on Feb. 14, my attention was called to the piping I a strange bird by a lady patient, with the request j , . , f o° something to keep it still, as it had annoyed her | all the morning. On leaving the house I heard the sharp, shrill note repeated at intervals of about one minute and saw a stranger sitting in a maple tree. After some delay 1 secured a gun and shot the bird. Great was my sur- prise when I picked it up to find I had secured a fine female evening grosbeak. The bird was evidently alone, as the lady who called my attention to it. informed me that she had heard the bird since daylight, and it had been constantly piping its single note, until I came to the rescue about 11 A. M. A careful search failed to detect the presence of any other birds, I mounted the specimen, and it will hold a conspicuous place in my cabinet. This is the second instance of the capture of this bird in Che- mung county, as far as I know, the other one having ! b ® en reported by Edward Swift, of Elmira, in December, 1887 - J. W. Gee, M.D. Van Ettenville, N. Y., Feb. 15. Editor Forest and Stream: The evening grosbeak, which has attracted so much attention of late, .made his first visit here this season Dec. 15, a second flock Jan. 15 and another flock of six Jan. 23; m fact I have seen them almost continually since their arrival until the present, my boy having seen them to- day feeding upon the red cedar berries as usual. I have preserved in all twelve fine specimens, males, females and young. I dissected all of them carefully and found their stomachs to contain only the berries of the red cedar. I also noticed that the flesh smelled very strong of the same. Generally these birds were very tame, allowing me to approach within a few feet without causing any alarm, and thdn again, at first sight they would all leave the tree in a body, uttering a rather loud whistle, flying high in the air, to return again in the course of a half hour. They seem to be a very restless bird. I do not think the heavy snow in the West (as reported) has anything to do with their migration here, as you know they have very heavy snows there every year. This is, I believe, the second appearance of this” species here in Ohio since 1860, when Dr. Kirtland. took several specimens. Albert Hall. Lake Wood, Ohio, Feb. 11. Editor Forest and Stream: Sometime during the winter of 1886-87 1 secured four specimens of the evening grosbeak, one full plumaged old male and three females. I shot them all at one shot and they comprised the entire flock. I did not know then what I had killed, but surmised it was the pine gros- beak. I mounted the male and two of the others and have two of them in my collection yet. The other I gave to a friend. The birds are the only ones I ever saw either alive or dead, and I do not know as they have been taken in this part of Ohio before. I described the ! male to a taxidermist of Cleveland and he said it was a pine grosbeak, but when I saw the cut of the evening grosbeak in Coues’s “Key” I discovered the mistake. Seville, Ohio, Feb. 15. CHIPPEWA. — j Editor Forest and Stream: While strolling on the banks of the Des Plaines River, on Jan. 28, about eight miles from the city hall, Chicago, 111., I saw a single bird in a large elm near the water’s edge. Having a ,32cal. Stevens pocket rifle, with shot cartridges to match, slung to my shoulder, I collected the bird and found the poor unfortunate, as I had thought, a stranger tome. Upon returning to my den I looked Evening Grosbeak ( Hesperiphona vespertina) at Lyons, N. Y. As this bird is such a very rare winter visitant in this section I take the liberty ot reporting its occurrence in our vicinity. During the latter part of December, the Evening Grosbeak was reported in Rochester, N. Y., the first time seen there since the winter of 1889-90, but it had not been ob- served here. Since then I have been watching carefully, hoping to make a record of this beautiful bird in our county. About ten days ago they were first seen in Lyons. Since that time they have been reported, almost daily, as occurring in flocks of from 6 to 10, in some section of the town, and to-day, February 4, 1911, I recorded 30 of these birds feeding about in the maples and picking up the buds from the ground which a recent wind and wet snowstorm had shaken from the trees. Both sexes were represented almost equally in the flock and exhibited marked tameness. It will be gratifying indeed if the erratic travels of these birds become more frequent and eastern people have the pleasure of becoming better acquainted with this common bird of the Northwest. E. Earl Elliott, Lyons, N. Y. Aok aa. Apr -lea p. Evening Grosbeak at Lowville, N. Y. - The Evening Grosbeaks (Hes- periphona vespertina vespertina) have been very plentiful here during the Tast winter and spring, they came in the latter part of December and were common up to the 15th of May when the bulk of them disappeared Two or three were seen as late as May 17. There was a flock of about fifty birds which made their home in the village feeding mainly on maple seeds They also fed on Sumac seeds of which they appeared to be very fond ' There was a good proportion of male birds in all stages of plumage. S' is the first instance^ to my knowledge, of this species having been here in such numbers — James H. Miller, Lowville, N. Y. JWT ***,// /-y 3z >- Evening Grosbeak at Rochester, N. Y.- About the middle of March we had a report from a correspondent in Massachusetts that the Evening Grosbeak ( Hesperiphona vespertina vespertina) had appeared there, so that it may be of interest to report that two pairs were seen here on. March 19 and 20 feeding in thorn apple bushes on the outskirts of the city. F. H. Ward, Rochester, N. Y. .xxx ///, 3 3 , 6 ' Occurrence of Coccothraustes vespertina in Iowa. — Among other visitors from the north, during the winter of 1886-87, numbers 'of Evening Grosbeaks appeared in this neighborhood. About the middle of December several were observed a short distance north of the city, but it was not until the first of February that they began to appear in the principal streets. When first noticed in the town, there was a flock of twenty-five or more feeding upon the samaras which were still attached to the branches of the box elders. The kernels of the keys were quickly and adroitly removed and the refuse allowed to fall upon the snow beneath, which after a short time was thickly strewn with the remains of the feast. February 23 a flock of over one hundred suddenly appeared on the University campus, and after remaining an hour or more, departed. From this date until April 30, nearly ten weeks, it was their custom to visit the campus early in the morning and remain until noon, when they would fly away and spend the remainder of the day elsewhere. During their stay the food of these birds consisted chiefly of the samarje of the box elders and sugar maples, the young leaf buds of various trees, seeds, and grain ; to obtain the latter, the whole flock would often alight on the ground and eagerly devour the scattered grain. As spring advanced they were usually seen, especially early in the morning, in the top of some tree, singing or chattering noisily, thus attracting the attention of nearly every passer-by. Their loud, clear, rather harsh, piping notes, uttered in concert, reminded one forcibly of the familiar chorus of a flock of Rusty Blackbirds in the spring, and have also been likened to the shrill piping arising from some frog pond on a quiet summer evening. In Iowa, the Evening Grosbeak may be regarded as a rai'e and erratic winter visitor, though its appearance is perhaps most regular in the northern portions of the State. It arrives from the north about the middle of November and remains until May. Prior to last winter it has been observed in the vicinity of Iowa City but once — in February, 1884. Correspondents have also reported this species from Charles City, in March, 1879; Grinnell, December and April, and Burlington in the southeastern part of the State. — C. R. Keyes, Iowa City , Town. Ank | Y. Jan. 1888. p. Evening Grosbeaks. O.^O. XV , , />■ AT SUMMIT, N. J. After reading the accounts in the February O. & O. of the unusual drift of the Evening Grosbeaks into the northeastern states, 1 thought I would add my experience to the list. On March 6, 1890 I was exceedingly sur- prised to see a flock of from ten to fifteen of these birds feeding on last year’s dogwood berries. They were exceedingly tame and allowed me to approach and stand under the tree where they were for quite a little while, being within about eight feet of one. They were mostly females. I was unable at the time to secure any for my collection, and so had to content myself by merely observing them. There were about eight inches of snow on the ground and the air was quite sharp. This is | the first time I have ever seen any around here. Wm. Oakley Raymond. 3*f Mr. Ridgway has since informed me that the following additional North American species are, in the first plumage, entirely immaculate beneath : Hesperiphona vespertina, .Oil If, O.Q. 4 ; Jan f *870 V6. 35 Breeding of the Evening Grosbeak ( Coccot/iraustes vespertina ) in the White Mountains of Arizona. — In ‘The Auk’ (Vol. IV. No. 3, p. 256, 257) I observed two notices of the occurrence of the Evening Grosbeak ; one from Toronto, Canada, the other from Hickman, Kentucky. In the latter case Mr. J. A. Allen is quoted as stating that “its occurrence anywhere south of the Great Lakes is rare.” It may, therefore, be of in- terest to readers of “The Auk” to know of an instance of this bird having bred as far southwest as the head-waters of the Little Colorado River in the White Mountains of Arizona. On June 5, 1884, while looking out for anything of ornithological inter- est in a thickly wooded canon some fifteen miles west of the little town of Springerville, Apache County, Arizona, my attention was attracted by a bird which I did not know, flying off its nest in the top of a thick willow bush. Having climbed up to the nest and ascertained that it contained three eggs I returned to the ranch. Next day I visited the cation with my shotgun, and finding that the number of eggs in the nest had not in- creased, concealed myself close by, and after a long wait succeeded in procuring the female as she flew from the nest. At that time I knew so little about American birds or their eggs that I took no eggs except when I could authenticate them by procuring the female bird. The nest was a comparatively slight structure, rather flat in shape, composed of small sticks and roots, lined with finer portions of the latter. The eggs, three in number, were of a clear, greenish ground color, blotched with pale brown. They were fresh. The nest was placed about fifteen feet from the ground in the extreme top of a thick willow bush. The slight canon, with a few willow bushes in its centre bordering a small stream, lies in the midst of very dense pine timber at an altitude of about 7000 feet, as far as I can judge. I mentioned the fact of my having taken the nest of the Evening Gros- beak to my friend, Mr. E. W. Nelson, but at first he was decidedly sceptical on the subject. On November 5, 1885, however, while staying at Mr. Nelson’s ranch, eight miles southwest of Springerville, and during a slight snowstorm, I saw a second specimen of this species among a large number of Mexican Crossbills ( Loxia curvirostra stricklandt) but failed to kill it. Next day (Nov. 6), while riding near the same place with Mr. Nelson, we came upon three Evening Grosbeaks, and after several shots he succeeded in killing a fine male with a charge of bucksnot! These are the only occasions that I have known of this bird being seen any- where around here, but ornithological observers here are few and far between. — John Swinburne, Springerville , Arizona. [Mr. Swinburne is probably the first ornithologist who has had the good fortune to find the nest of this species, although Mr. W, E. Bryant’s later discovery has already been recorded.* — E d.] * Bull. Cal. Acad. Sci. Vol. IT, 1887. Auk, Y. Jan. 1888. p. //?'/?. BULLETIN. Discovery of the Eggs of the Even- ing Grosbeak. No. 8. California Academy of Sciences. DISCOVERY OF THE NEST AND EGGS OF THE EVENING GROSBEAK ( Coccothraustes vespertina . ) BY WALTER E. BRYANT. Read June 20, 1887. Although this species was first described in 1825, I be- lieve that no description of its nest and eggs has previously appeared. Accordingly I take pleasure in announcing the discovery of the first nest and eggs, by Mr. E. H. Fiske, in Yolo County, California. Regarding this interesting find- ng, Mr. h iske has written me the following particulars from his field notes. The nest, containing four eggs, was taken May 10th, 1886, but incubation was so far advanced that he was unable to preserve them. In general shape, color and marking, they were similar to eggs of the Black-headed Grosbeak, but in size he thinks they were somewhat larger. The nest was built in a small live oak, at a height of ten feet, and was a more pretentious 'structure than is usually built by the Black-headed Grosbeak, being composed of small twigs supporting a thin layer of fibrous bark, and a lining of horse hair. It is to be hoped that Mr. Fiske will be successful in find- ing additional specimens from which measurements may be determined. 32— Bull. Cal. Acad. Sci, II. 8. Issued July 23, 1887. l 357- Discovery of the Nest and Eggs of the Evening Grosbeak ( Coccothraustes vespertina). From a paper by Walter E. Bryant, read before the California Academy of Sciences, June 20, 1887. Ibid., No. 5, Aug. 25, p. 86. SPor, & Stream, Yol.XXIX BY ,J. P. N. Mr. Walter E. Bryant read a short paper be- fore the California Academy of Sciences, on June 20tli, 1887, in which lie described the dis- covery of the first nest and eggs of the Even- ing Grosbeak, ( Hesperiphona vespertina) ever found. The lucky man was Mr. E. H. Fiske, and he found the nest in Yolo County, Califor- nia. Mr. Bryant says : “The nest, containing four eggs, was taken May 10th, 1886, but incubation was so far ad- vanced that he was unable to preserve them. In general shape, color and markings, they were similar to eggs of the Black-headed Grosbeak, but in size he thinks they were somewhat larger. “ The nest was built in a small live oak. at a height of ten feet, and was a more pretentious structure than is usually built by the Black- headed Grosbeak, being composed of small twigs supporting a thin layer of fibrous bark, and a lining of horse hair. “ It is to be hoped that Mr. Fiske will be suc- cessful in finding additional specimens from which measurements may be determined.” The present writer cordially joins in the above hope, but he cannot help deploring the fact that the eggs were not preserved in alco- hol. No matter how large the embryos in eggs are, they can always be preserved in alcohol, and surely such specimens are better than none at all in the case of rare eggs like these. O.& o. XII, Sept. 1887 p /VV 37 NOTES ON THE BIRDS OF FORT KLAMATH, OREGON. The Evening Grosbeak in Minnesota. BY DR. J. C. MERRILL, U. S. A. With remarks on certain species by William Brewster . [ Concluded from p, 262.\ Coccothraustes vespertina.— A common resident. Several large flocks arrived from the south early in March, and smaller ones were seen until the middle of May, after which only pairs and single birds were observed. During the spring I obtained specimens at short intervals, and from care- ful dissections of them am convinced that in this vicinity the bird is a late breeder, not depositing eggs before the latter part of June or the first of July. At this time they are generally to be found in the largest firs, and in these trees, rather than in pines, X think they build, at least about Fort Klamath. Indeed, I have twice watched pairs carrying some building material into a huge fir, but was unable to locate the nests exactly and, even if I had, should probably have been unable to get to them, great as the inducement would have been. Their note is a loud whistling call that may be heard at a considerable distance, and which is often repeated. In winter the crops were filled with seeds and crushed buds, and often fine bits of gravel ; in summer in- sects, and especially caterpillars, were generally found. It is rather difficult to prepare good specimens of this Grosbeak, for the skin is very thin, tears easily, and many feathers drop out; when one is shot, and in falling happens to strike a branch, so many feathers are gen- erally knocked out that it is not worth skinning. In winter, when there is snow on the ground, good specimens may be obtained by shooting only such birds as will have a clear fall from the branch they are on into soft snow. There is considerable variation in the color of the bill, and this is inde- pendent of sex; in some the entire bill is a clear light apple-green, scarcely or not at all tinged with yellow; in others the maxilla is pale yellowish tinged slightly with green, the mandible being horn color, tinged with greenish yellow only at the tip and cutting edge, and there are many gradations between these extremes. I have seen none in which the bill was “dusky at the base,” as stated in ‘ History of N. A. Birds,’ and which is probably the result of drying. Auk, V. October, 1888. p.357 RY GEO. G. CANTWELL, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. This beautiful bird, peculiar to the North- west, is the largest and handsomest of its race. They are the brightest of our northern visitors, arriving in this locality about the first of Janu- ary when cold weather sets in, and may be seen in flocks of from ten to thirty almost any day. feeding on the seeds of the maple. At this time of the year the males greatly outnumber the females, while in the spring the females pre- dominate and scarcely a male can be found. The bright old male as he sits in the top of a tree on a bright day appears to be a lump of shining gold, but as soon as killed, they seem to lose their lustre, although he is still a beauty ; the snow-white secondary quills contrasting with his bright yellow and shining black dress. The female is more modestly attired, partaking of the general color of the male, but much paler and with a brownish tinge, and lacking the white on the wings. Both have extremely large bills of a greenish yellow. They are very unwary birds, allowing a person to approach within a few feet of them. Those taken in the woods are always bright and clean, while those of the city are very dark colored. I have come to the conclusion that they spend the cold nights on cliimney-tops and in that way get their plumage soiled with smoke and coal dust. The males leave us about the middle of April, and at the same time quantities of females put in an appearance. I am unable to say whether they arrive from the South, or if they are all the females left behind by the males. The lat- ter seems the most probable, but there are many more females than there were in the win- ter, so some must come from some other place. They stay in the woods altogether, feeding on the young buds of different trees and grow very fat. They leave about the first week in May for the North, where they lay their eggs and rear their young undisturbed. I do not believe they pass through this section in the Fall, as i have never seen a single individual at that time. O.&O. XII. Apr.1887 p. icO ■ Notes upon the Sudden Appearance in Numbers of the Evening Gros- beak at Fort Wingate, New Mexico. — For four years and more (1884-1888) I have made constant and careful observations during all seasons upon the birds that are to be found in the country about Fort Wingate, New Mexico. Much of this time I have rambled over this region almost daily, collecting birds and mammals and making extended notes upon them. During the first three years the Evening Grosbeak ( Coccothraustes ves- pertina) was not to be found in the vicinity during either the vernal or autumnal migrations, and I never so much as heard its note. My mind was about satisfied that the species was not a visitant to this part of the range of the Rocky Mountains, when the doubt was suddenly dissipated last month (October, 1888) while I was out collecting in the pine forests about two miles from the station. There I met with a little party of four individuals, all females, and in wretched plumage; three of these were secured. A little later and in a different locality, this time some two miles in the opposite direction from the Fort, I came upon a very hand- some pair, and succeeded m taking the male. He was an old one in fine autumnal feather. I saw no more of them until yesterday (Nov. 10, 1888), at which time I was with my gun in the cedar woods quite close to my house. The day was clear and the temperature moderate, though heavy frosts had occurred on the two preceding days and nights. The woods were actually alive with Robins (M. m. propinqua ), feeding upon the cedar berries, and I soon discovered that numbers of Evening Gros- beaks were with them. At first I met with these latter in small flocks, from five to ten in number, but as I came into more favorable localities, they appeared in straggling parties consisting of from thirty to a hundred individuals. They mingled with the Robins both in the trees and in the loose flocks that, kept passing overhead, and frequently gave vent to their loud and shrill whistle. There was no trouble in approaching them, while feeding upon the berries, as they appeared to be quite unsuspicious and not easily alarmed. My collecting basket soon contained a fine assortment of these truly beautiful creatures, they being in rich autumnal dress, and only occasionally was one to be met with that had not quite completed this plumage. The females differed considerably in their col- oring, while in some of the males X observed that the rich orange band of the forehead and superciliary line was carried around in diminishing breadth to fairly meet the stripe of the opposite side at the occiput and completely blend with it there. In the males, too, the plumage of the legs is black, with the feathers each narrowly bordered with yellowish green ; this feature is not usually described by ornithologists. Only a lew moments ago X made up some half dozen skins of these birds, and my two sons each made a pair more apiece, all carefully selected. I was not a little surprised to find my experiences both in this and in shooting the speci- mens to be at complete variance with those of Dr. Merrill, as mentioned by him in a recent issue of ‘The Auk’ (Oct. 1888, p. 357)- Neither I nor my sons found any difficulty whatever in making capital skins of these specimens, and I am quite sure I did not lose more than a feather to a bird in those that I prepared, and the skin in none of them appeared to me to be unusually thin. Moreover, some of them were killed with No. 8 shot, and in falling bumped down through the pine trees without any apparent damage, and only with the loss of a feather or two. It is diffi- cult for me to account for this difference in our observations, infinitely the more so when the statement comes from the pen of such an accurate describer as is Dr. Merrill. This extraordinary flight of these Grosbeaks here, convinces me that either the bird is inclined to be at times very erratic in its migrations, or else it may have to do with the approaching season, perhaps indicating a coming winter of unusual severity. An excellent series of skeletons rewarded my collecting, and as I pre- dicted in my letter in the October ‘Auk’, th e. secondary palatine processes are absent, the entire skull much resembling that part of the skeleton in Coccothraustes vulgaris , as figured for us by Huxley.— R. W. Shufeldt, Fort Wingate , Ne-w Mexico. j-.. »» e - p - n-7y. General Notes. 93 1S90.] Notes upon Coccothraustes vespertina as a Cagebird. — In ‘The Auk’ for January, 1889, I presented a few notes having reference to the sudden appearance, at Fort Wingate, New Mexico, of the Evening Grosbeak in considerable numbers. The migration to which my remarks referred oc- cured in October and November, 1888, and I went on to say how fortu- nate I was upon that occasion in collecting quite a number of those beautiful birds. As the flocks became larger and more numerous I would m firing into them with the fine dust shot I was using, often wound several individuals, but these were despatched in the usual way and either skins or skeletons made up from the specimens. Later, however the thought struck me that it would be a good thing to try and save some of these slightly wounded ones with the view of making cage pets of them and as luck would have it the very same afternoon I came upon a flock numbering considerably over a hundred. They were resting in an old leafless piflon tree, and in the midst of the flock sat a stately male whose' olive green coat was nearly black, it was so dark, and the white of his wings was dazzling in contrast, it was so very white. At the double re- port of my gun a dozen or fifteen came tumbling down through the tree and fell upon the spotless, drifted snow beneath it such beauties! Among them, with his jet-black wings and tail spread out upon this powdery frozen carpet, lay the fine old patriarch of the flock, for I had made him the target of my first barrel. After all these specimens had been cared for, each placed with the due precautions in its separate paper cone, there was discovered sitting on a side-twig of another scrubby pine, near by, a fine female, that had evidently sustained some wounds, bpon capturing her these were found to consist in a broken wing and leg and an oblique shot through the corner of the eye, but red-eyed and fractured as she was, I determined to take her home in her then condition and see what good nursing would do towards repairing her numerous inju ries. To shorten this part of my account, I will only add that in due time she made a most excellent recovery, and long before that came about she had become wonderfully gentle, and allowed me to handle her without biting me with her powerful beak, as she would do for a week or more just after her capture. She was kept upon a pine bough in the deep re cess of a window in my study, and fed every day upon fresh cedar berries ol which these birds are inordinately fond, and with which she would gorge herself as fast as she could see to pick them from the branches by the aid ol her single good eye, and her crippled limbs to get about among the twigs with. Shortly her eye was much improved, and she would whistle shrilly as soon as she caught sight of me coming towards her with a fresh branch loaded with her favorite food. In eating the berries the outside skin and soft part are rapidly removed by rolling them deftly around between the powerful mandibles, when the seed is quickly swallowed and the bird ducks over and picks a fresh one to extract the seed in the same manner, and this she would keep up until her alimentary canal seemed almost ready to burst with the unnatural distention. Sometime SOME NOTES CONCERNING THE EVENING GROS- BEAK. BY AMOS W. BUTLER. The Evening Grosbeak is pre-eminently and typically a bird of the coniferous forests of the Northwest. The first specimen known was taken by Schoolcraft in 1823 near Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, from which William Cooper described the species in the Ann. N. Y. Lyc. N. H., Jan. 10, 1825. Bonaparte figured it in 1828, and noted two other specimens that had been taken near Lake Athabasca. Sir John Richardson refers to specimens from Carlton House, British America. Wlule from these statements one gets some iaea oi ns range, yet the knowledge is but approximate, as we are just beginning to understand anything at all of its distribution. Ihe Valley of Mexico appears to be as far south as it has been found. There it spends its summers among the mountains and descends to the Valley to winter. It has been taken at intervals from there north, throughout the coniferous region, from the deserts of Arizona to the Barren Grounds of Arctic America. It spends the summer in the northwestern United States and western British America, from just east of the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific. From there it migrates very irregularly in autumn to the eastward, cas- ually reaching over a greater or less part of the eastern United States, north of a line drawn from the mouth of the Ohio east to the Atlantic. Dr. Kirtland, in the ‘Ohio Farmer’, March 24, i860, mentioned that the previous week on a certain day a female of this species was secured by a gentleman, and the following day he saw several others (near Cleveland). He said it had never before been taken east of Lake Michigan, but notes that Dr. Hoy has occasionally found it near Racine, Wisconsin. Dr. J. M. Wheaton, in his ‘Catalogue of Ohio Birds,’ tS6o [1861], men- tioned the capture of a specimen at Columbus in 1847, which he became satisfied was an error and afterwards corrected. Mr. Thomas Mcllwraith informs us of the first four records of the occurrence of these birds within the Province of Ontario, FURTHER NOTES ON THE EVENING GROSBEAK. BY AMOS W. BUTLER. In addition to the records of the range of the Evening Gros- beak ( Coccothraustes vespertinus) , given in ‘The Auk’ for July, 1892, I am enabled, through the kindness of several friends, to offer some additional notes. In the winter of 1889-90 Evening Grosbeaks -were tolerably common in the vicinity of Ft. Wayne, Indiana. Mr. C. A. Stockbridge, in addition to the two reported Feb. 15, 1890, noted eleven Feb. 16, one March 22, one April 9, and one April 12. Mr. C. E. Aiken of Salt Lake City, Utah, informs me that a large number of specimens were obtained near Whiting Station, Indiana, in the winter of 1S86-S7 by Mr. R. A. Turtle of Chicago. To some few of these I have doubtless referred before. Prof. F. Cramer, Lawrence University, Appleton, Wis., under date of March 14, 1891, says: “Two weeks ago a flock of five Evening Grosbeaks spent a few minutes on a tree in our back yard. They were quietly eating the little crab apples that had not fallen off the tree. Feb. 7 Professor Lummis saw a flock of ten eating the fruit of a climbing bitter-sweet near his house. They did not stay long.” coniiiiciiieiii. ±11 our ya.ru was a crau-appie tree. rue ground beneath it was covered with the little fruits. When the Gros- beaks had exhausted the supply of food in the orchard they came to this tree. When frightened, while upon the ground, they in- variably flew straight up among the branches of that tree instead of flying off to some other. I arranged an old pigeon net among the branches to try to catch some. When coming to feed they always alighted in a body upon the ground, and did not alight May, 1885.] AND OOLOGIST. 09 B atively, and though great interest manifested on the subject, little accomplished. The older writers were, perhaps, better versed in ge than the more recent authors, ions, particularly those of ljuttall, excellent, but the full series of lotes of a bird, and every? species ave never been described in detail. % Vireo arrives from tl^e 27th of i of May. About the middle of the birds usually seek for a loca- A nest w s begun oh the 12th e season, but such anj early effort is unusual. The birds depart for the /outli during the last part of September. 67. [140.] Lanmreo flavifrons (iaeill.) Baird. Yellow-throated Yireo. A common Summer resident. Arrives worn April 25th to May 8th, and becomes common and tuneful soon after the first appearance. Breeds plentifully, but the found wi nests are very ran of the Yellow-throat are very pi be heard at quite a distance, song over a half mile away day. The modulation o means equal to the beauti and Warbling, but is chee 1 degree of vivacity comm' songs, which is so inspir only nests which I have r us. The notes etrating and can I have heard the n a quiet Summer ong is not by any ! otes of the Red-eye and possesses that to all the Vireos’ to the stroller. The were placed at an elevation of not moreihaii ten feet above the ground, and were situat/d at the forked extremi- ties of lower limbs. The news are, however, often built well up in t/ies. They are very neatly arranged structures and are surpassed in elegance of workmanship by yery few nests known to me. The outside is covered with licltens of various colors, the exterior /resenting a vesy neat appear- ance. The birds disappear in late ^September or early October. 68. [141,] Lmfvireo solitarius (Vielll.) Baird. Blue-lieaded or Solitary Yireo. Never a com- mon species w/th us. If a collector secures one specimen each migration he is doing remarkably well. I liayfe not met with a dozen specimens during the /ast seventeen years in which I ly 21 been taking notes. The Blue-head is tpnb transient /with us, and is found the secor third wofeks in May, as a rule. It occasic^h appears/ by the 5th of the month. It is nc cordedr later than the 20th of May with have wet to meet with two specimens in the si woods at one time.. The species may be social its /breeding haunts, but during migrations, so hi (my limited observations extend, it is pre-emiJ ■ solitary. 69. [148] "Tardus borealis (Vieill.) Great Norti ■rn Shrike. An irregular transient, generally ap- pearing from the north in November, and return- ing north through our county inJMarcli. /6cca- sioVally seen throughout the winter singly or in Quite common some seasons; again rare for two or three successive years. Hhve met with this Shrike in^November, December, Janu- ary, February, March and April. Never seen here in VSummer, and only ‘rarely after”April'lst. It gives way to the more southern species, Lanius hidovicianusexcubitorides, which appears in March or late February. In looking over a copy of the 7 ' “O. and O.” of issue January, 1885, I find that Dr. Atkins em- braces the Great Northern Shrike in his list of the birds of Lbcke, Michigan, ’as a Summer bird. He, however, fjpls to embrace the White-rumped his list. There must be a mis- take somewhere! for I am. sure that the White- rump is common as far worth as 43° north lati- tude, while the Great Northern is not embraced by any reliable coHector' in the State as a Sum- mer resident. If this point could be definitely settled I would be greatly pleased, and trust that the collectors of the SState will give their experi- ence with this specie/ 70. [149.] Laniunj l/iMovicianiis, Linn. Log- gerhead Shrike. ]?or years I confounded this species with the next foren, and have only within the last few year/ extricated myself from such a surprising and disagreeable dilemma. I cheer- fully make this’ acknowledgement of my error, because it may be that soi\e reader of the “O. and O.” with f whom I have, corresponded will call to mind remarks I made some years ago rela- tive to members of this genus , m which I was un- doubtedly wrong. After a careful study of the Shrikes I am convinced that tlfl^ species is rare with us a / compared to the WhiteVump, and may be considered as scarce in the State. The data that I liAve are still too meagre for publication. 71. [f49 a.] Lanius ludovicianus Sexcubitorides (Sw.) Cones. White-rumped Shrike. .Very com- mon /in Kalamazoo County, for at Beast seven mon/hs of the .year. White-rump arrives about the/niddle of March, as a rule. In advanced sea- lie annears sometimes in the last %eek of Birds of KalamazooOounty.Mich, Dr. Morris Gibbs. 74. [165.] Hesperiphona vespertina (Cooper.) Bp. Evening Grosbeak. A rare and very irregular Fall, .Winter and Spring visitor. My earliest record for the year is November 25th, while small flocks were seen in 1879 as late as May 1st. The 43 ORNITHOLOGIST [Vol. 10-No. 5 when the most rigorous weather prevailed, while at the same time the reported presence of Snowy Owls birds have only appeared in the County two years in my experience. Perhaps they often ap- pear as transients in severe seasons, when they hasten by us and are not seen. I can hardly al- low, however, that either this species or the Pine is driven to the south by the severity of the weather. For if this is a fact, it would be reason- able to expect other northern birds in numbers during the same cold weather, a conclusion which is quite at variance with my observations on our Winter visitors. During the years that the Evening Grosbeak appeared, there was nothing to indicate that the Pine Grosbeaks were driven south by the cold weather. In fact, no specimens of enucleator had been seen for the past four seasons, nor since then, now ten years. Neither has it been proven that Snowy Owls, Bohemian Wax-wings or other rare stragglers are more abundant during the season when some other Winter visitors appear as common. It may be maintained that the scarcity of food is the prime cause of the movements of these northern forms. Such a conclusion is even less tenable than the view of those advancing severity of the weather as the chief reason. If scarcity of food caused the birds to seek more southern sections, we might reasonably infer that the Pine and Evening Grosbeaks would appear simulta- neously, as the habits of the two are similar, both feeding on the same varieties of berries and buds while here. This is shown not to be the case. Again, what reason is there to prove that the Hawk Owl, Snowy Owl and Gyrfalcon, which are seen in our southern counties during different Winters, are driven here by scarcity of food? We must feel satisfied that the same amount of animal food is found in the north as in other Winters, if it were not so, a replenishing of the country occupied by the carnivorous birds could not possibly take place within one year, and from necessity they would appear the following season, a point which is not substantiated. It is also reasonable to conclude that in case of scarcity of food the birds would visit other sec- tions where the trees from which they feed, or the small mammals and birds on which they feed, were found, and not to* more southern haunts where a change of faunae and florae would occur. In this light we might with equal propriety con- clude that the Owls would seek more northern quarters, or at least localities situated within isothermal boundaries. As a very conclusive proof that the scarcity of food theory is not firmly founded, I might call to the minds of the readers of the “ O. and O.” a certain work on arctic ex- plorations — reference not now at hand— in which Snowy Owls are recorded repeatedly during the so- journ of a party in the extreme north, and at a time within not only the U. S., but in Michigan was heralded in daily papers as a conclusive proof of the severe weather throughout the country. I have diverged from my regular routine in order to discuss this much talked of and less un- derstood subject, and trust that in so doing some readers may be interested to the extent of cai e- fully noting the appearances of our northern vis- itors with careful remarks on correlative condi- tion of weather, food, &c. The subject of migra- tion is so little understood, that, notwithstanding the great strides towards the elucidation of the main points in the last few years, there still is a wide field open to the close observer. At present we are fairly acquainted with the migrations of those species which come to us in the Spring and return to the south in the Fall, but in the rarer species constant variations are recorded by vari- ous observers in different parts of the country. These apparent variations are to my mind entirely due to the fact that the birds are little known, and therefore not accurately recorded, and it is my opinion founded entirely on theory and my own observations, that the irregular migrations of many northern birds are generally seasonal, and not in any wise due to either severity of the weather or scarcity of food. The fact that many species leave us for the south every Autumn is not by any means a nec- essary result of our rigorous Winters. On the contrary, comparatively few of our Summer birds would have to go south from inability to withstand our severe weather. A good illustra- tion of the ability of a more southern bird to live in our climate during the Winter months, was furnished a few seasons ago when an escaped Redbird, ( 0 . vwginianus), was found to live with apparent comfort throughout a severe Winter. It sang cheerily and fed on the buds and seeds a’s if born in the grove of evergreens which it selected for its northern home. No instance of a capture of a wild Cardinal Grosbeak in our county has ever taken place. We think that migrations occur each year among the northern birds, and that various lo- calities are visited different seasons. It is proba- bly as fair to credit the Northern Grosbeaks, Redpolls, Snow Buntings and Owls with seasonal migrations as it is to admit of the uncertain changes of the erratic Red-bellied Nuthatch, Robin and many others. It is reasonable to sup- pose that the Evening Grosbeak is a common bird at least, half the Winters, on the northern borders of Lake Superior, while it is a rare visitor to our southern counties, simply because it is a species of the extreme north, and not in the habit of migrating south of 45° north lat. Q.& O. X, May. 1886. p. 6 f~ *70. BULLETIN OP THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB. Vol. IV. APRIL, 1879. No. 2. HISTORY OF THE EVENING GROSBEAK* BY ELLIOTT COUES. A bird of the most distinguished appearance, indeed, is the Even- ing Grosbeak, t whose very name of the “ Vesper-voiced ” suggests * By permission, from advance copy of “Birds of the Colorado Valley,” Vol. II. —Ed. t Hesperiphona vespertina. Fringilla vespertina, Cooper, Ann. Lyc. N. Y. I, Pt. II, 1825, 220 (descr. orig. Saute Ste. Marie, Michigan). — C oop., Annals of Philos. XI, 1826, 135. — Less., Feruss. Bull. 2 6 Sect. VII, 1826,. 110. — Bp., Ann. Lyc. N. Y. II, 1826, 113, No. 188. — Less., Feruss. Bull. 2' Sect. XII, 1827, 267. — Bp., Zool.' Journ. IV, 1828, 2. — Bp., Am. Orn. II, 1828, 75, pi. 15, f. 1 . — Nutt., Man. I, 1832, 594 . —Cooper, Isis, XXV, 1832, 1073. — Aud., 0. B. IV, 1838, 515, pis. 373^, 4259. — Towns., Journ. Phila. Acad. VIII, 1839, 154. Coccothraustes vespertina, Sw. & Rich., F. B. A. II, 1831, 269, pi. 68. — Bp., C. & G. L. 1838, 30. —Aud., Syn. 1839, 134. — Aud., B. A. Ill, 1841, 217, pi. 207 . — -Henry, Pr. Phila. Acad. 1855, 312 (New Mexico). — C ottle, Canad. Journ. Ill, 1855, 287 (Canada ; historical and descriptive). Coccothraustes vespertinus, Gamb., Journ. Phila. Acad. I, 1847, 49 . — Scl., P. Z. S. 1860, 251 (Orizaba). — S ol., Cat. Am. Birds, 1862, 123. — Ridgw., Ann. Lyc. N. Y. X, 1874, 371 (Illinois). Cocoborus vespertinus, Hoy, Pr. Phila. Acad. 1853, 383 (Wisconsin). Hesperiphona vespertina, Bp., C. R. XXXI, 1850, 424 ; C. A. I, 1850, 505. — Bd., B. N. A. 1858, 409. — Henry, Pr. Phila. Acad. 1859, 107 (N. Mexico). — Coop. & Suckl., P. R. R. Rep. XII, Pt. II, 1859, 196. — Kirtland, Ohio Farmer, IX, of Mar. 24, 1860 (Ohio). — Wheaton, Ohjo Agr. Rep. for 1860, 1861. — Blakist., Ibis, 1862, 5 ; 1863, 69 (Fort Carlton). — Coues, Pr. Phila. Acad. 1866, 80 (Arizona). — McIlwraith, Pr. Essex Inst. V. 1866, 88 (Wood- stock, Canada). — Lawr., Ann. Lye. N. Y. VIII, 1866, 289 (near New York City). — C oues, Pr. Essex Inst. V, 1868, 280, 312 (Canada and New York — VOL. IV. 5 /L itixz- $ C/t\ k. i I. THE EVENING GROSBEAK — Hesperiphona vespertina, Bonap. [Plate I and Frontispiece.] Among the rarities in the cabinet of most ornithological collectors is the Evening Grosbeak, which excites interest as much by its com- parative rarity and exceeding capriciousness in distribution as on ac- count of its odd note and eccentric behavior. First found by Mr. Schoolcraft, in 1823, near Sault St. Marie, in Michigan, it was de- scribed by Cooper. The indefatigable naturalist, Sir John Richard- son, encountered it upon the Saskatchewan, where seems to be its nat- ural home, and from whence it issues forth, guided by any whim, and wanders far to the East and South, though seeming to avoid the coast. The genus is Asiatic and our two species are obviously derived from the Old World, via Alaska. In Europe there is a closely allied genus Coccothraustes, which differs in the shape of the secondary wing feath- ers. The genus is distinguished from all other finches of the United States by the very large beak and the following points : “ Feet short ; tarsus less than the middle toe ; lateral toes nearly equal, and reaching to the base of the middle claw. Claws much curved, stout, compressed. Wings very long and pointed, reaching beyond the middle of the tail. Primaries much longer than the nearly equal secondaries and tertials ; outer two quills long- est ; the others rapidly graduated. Tail slightly forked ; scarcely more than two thirds the length of the wings, its coverts covering nearly three-fourths of its extent. "—Baird. [In America we have the two species, H. vespertina (with its two varieties), and II. abeillii , Scl., which lives in the mountainous por- tions of Mexico, southward. ] In very few places in the United States does this bird appear with sufficient constancy to be set down as more than an accidental visitor. In this respect Minneapolis, Minn., is particularly favored for, during a number of years, these grosbeaks have rarely failed to make a longer or shorter winter visit, sometimes coming early in the Autumn and re- maining until the trees are in full leaf, when, in a few cases, their much 6 BULLETIN OF THE LABORATORIES mooted song has been heard. The most eastern point yet reached by these birds seems to be Cleveland, Ohio, and isolated cases of their oc- currence in Wisconsin and Illinois are also known. The species is highly gregarious and individuals are rarely or never met with singly. Even the destructive inroads of the collector, before whom they are absolutely defenseless, do not scatter or break up the flock. Unsus- pecting and without fear, they continue to feed until the last individual falls a victim. The migrating colony seems well satisfied with itself and its temporary home and, while feeding, a constant chorus of an- swering cries is kept up. The note is not loud but is remarkably piercing, and yet not unmelodious. The early belief that these birds are silent except at evening is entirely erroneous. In spring, upon the approach of the breeding season, the males cultivate the muses in an odd but not displeasing little song. This song consists of several suc- cessive repetitions of a short warble, followed by a similar strain clos- ing with a shrill cry, like the finale of a black-bird’s song. The phrase which makes up the body of the song is musical, but is so abruptly ter- minated (as though from lack of breath or of ability, ) that it is annoy- ing when heard singly, for one is subjected to much the same nervous expectancy felt in listening to a hen’s cackle when quite leisurely “working up the agony” sufficiently to sound the final note. A flock of a dozen or more singing together produce a very musical ef- fect. The food almost entirely consists of the seeds of various trees, among which the box elder, the maple, poplar, and pine are pre-emi- nent. Buds of cherry and other trees are also eaten, and this regime is varied by occasional insect larvae, etc. O. B. Johnson, who mentions this grosbeak from the Willianrette valley, speaks of it as plentiful during migrations, and states that “ the only note heard was a loud ‘ yeeip,' strikingly like the call of a lost chicken.” Of the nest and eggs we as yet know nothing, and so of the many interesting traits which make up the sum of its true home- life we must be content to remain ignorant. From its inaccessable summer home it continues to descend during the severe winter weather and, almost under the very roofs of the factories of a busy city, con- tentedly passes the short days, heedless of the noise and regardful only of the oily kernels of the keys of the box elder, which it displays a very awkward skill in plucking as it swings (head downwards or oth- erwise) from the pendulous branches. These brief remarks are designed simply as introductory to the OF DENISON UNIVERSITY. 7 notes on the osteology appended. Before preceding to these the fol- lowing description will suffice to make the bird recognizable. Sp. char. Bill, yellowish green, dusky at base ; anterior half of body dusky yellowish olive, shading into yellow to the rump above, and the under tail coverts below. Outer scapulars, a broad frontal band continued on each side over the eye, axillaries, and middle of under wing coverts, yellow. Feathers along the ex- treme base of bill, the crown, tibiae, wings, upper tail coverts, and tail, black ; in- ner greater wing-coverts and tertiaries, white. Length, 7.30, wing, 4.30, tail, 2.75. In the female the head and back is dull olivaceous brown. Below, the body is pale yellowish ash. There is an obscure black line on either side the chin. There is more white upon the wings and tail. (See plate, which is intended to give simply the tout ensemble without strict accuracy as to color.) Osteology of Hesperiphona vespertina. 1 he anatomy of the Evening Grosbeak is of more than usual inter- est, not only on account of the rarity of the bird and the air of mystery which has associated itself with it, but because it stands at the head of American Pi mgillidae , by virtue of possessing the extreme develop- ment of the finch type of structure. Our observations are based on the study of three more or less perfect skeleta, which, so far as we know, are the first which have been studied. The skull. The most striking peculiarities of the skull are those which are corelated ' with the extraordinary development of the beak. I he angle, for instance, formed by the quadratojugal-jugal bony pillar with the lower margin of the maxilla is greater than usual, chiefly on account of the great size of the quadrate bone. In this way a firm support is afforded to the upper jaw. But we pass to a detailed de- scription. As seen from above, the skull is, in outline, a perfect trian- gle, with a narrow rounded base. The apex of the triangle is formed by the remarkably large and strong (though correspondingly very light) beak. 1 he bones entering the beak are cancellated within, forming a firm but light organ. I hese bones are, first, the premaxilla, which makes up the bulk of the bony frame-work of the beak and is early anchylosed with the maxillaries in the family under consideration. Although we can not separate the parts, we may distinguish in the max- illary bone a superior or nasal process which separates the opening of the nares and unites with the nasal bones, two lateral or maxillary pro- cesses, and two palatine processes which are within the mouth-opening- The distance from the apex of the beak to the subcircular nares is .6 inches, the distance between them, . 10 . The nasals are inseparably BULLETIN OF THE LABORATORIES united and form a quadrate bone making an angle of 25 0 with the cul- men or upper line of the beak, their combined width is .45, and they form the posterior borders of the nares, being united laterally with the maxillaries, anteriorally with the intermaxillary, below with the lachry- mals, and posteriorly with the frontals. The distance from the angle of the mandible to the top of the nasals is .40. Occupying the top of the skull, and apparently restricted to the space between the orbits, are the concave frontals. The distance between the orbits is about .35. The remainder of the roof of the skull is formed by the con- fluent parietals which occupy a larger area than usual on the top and back of the skull. From above can be seen a small prominence be- hind, which covers the cerebellum, and hence is called the cerebellar -prominence. The sides of the triangle are continued backward from the ends of the maxillaries by a slender rod consisting of the qnadra- tojugal and the jugal which can be studied to advantage when the skull is viewed from the side. In this position the skull is seen to present the outline of two triangles, the smaller of which, forming the beak, is set at an angle of 45 0 with the other. The cutting edges of the jaw ( tomia ), supported chiefly by the maxillary bones, are slightly curved. The tomia are .80 long. The slender rod passing backward and downward and forming the lower outline of the second triangle is, in the young, composed of two bones, the jugal and quadratojugal. Their combined length is .54, the posterior articulation being upon the outermost process of the peculiar quadrate bone. This bone is con- sidered the homologue of the little ear bone of mammals, known as the malleus, but in birds has a very important function — that of giving the necessary movability and yet stability to the beak. It is the point of attachment of the two important supports of the facial part of the skull. The form of the quadrate is very irregular, consisting of a body and six processes. The styloid process is the largest and is that which connects the bone with the base of the skull ; it is a flattened vertical pillar with a large articular surface; jutting out anteriorly is the orbital process, about .30 long, which extends into the orbit. Just below the orbital is the pterygoid process of rather small size. The mandiblar end bears two curved processes so situated that the glenoid surfaces oppose the rami from within and behind, while the jaw is com- pletely locked by the large articular process of the mandible. A more complete articulation could scarcely be conceived. The malar pro- cess extends out horizontally and offers an oblique surface to the head OF DENISON UNIVERSITY. 9 of the quadrato-jugal. The lachrymal bone is very large and hoe- shaped, occupying the whole anterior aspect of the orbit. A very slender curved process extends backward from its lower angle. The lachrymo-nasal space between this and the maxillary permits the free movement of the beak on the skull. The lachrymo-nasal foramen is quadrate. The optic foramen occupies its usual position on the mar- gin of the ali-sphenoid, which is inseparably united with the septum intraorbitale and this with the ethmoid still farther forward. There is a large irregular foramen above the optic. The greater part of the side of the skull behind the orbit is formed by the squamosal , which is strongly ridged and forms, first, a strong flange-like process behind the orbit and, second, a very long process projecting forward toward the corresponding process of the lachrymal. The orbito-sphenoid was not detected as a distinct bone, but irregular processes on the ali-sphenoid may represent it. The sclerotals are membranous bones, which unite to form a ring about the globe of the eye. As seen from below, sev- eral new bones appear. At the back of the skull is the large foramen magnum, subcordate and quadrate in form and about . 20 in width. Above, it is bounded by the supraoccipital, laterally by the exoccipitals, and below by the basioccipital. These bones are intimately united and the sutures quite obliterated. There is an impressed line on either side the foramen. The single occipital condyle is a small knob- like process. The basioccipital is quadrate and near its lateral mar- gins are the foramina of the carotid and the seventh, ninth, tenth and eleventh nerves. The squamosal expands into a large shield-like cov- ering over the auditory meatus. J ust inside of the quadrate bone can be seen a bony sheath which indicates the former point of union of the Meckel’s cartilage. Within the meatus the minute auditory ossicles can be seen with a glass. The sphenoid is a pyramidal bone, soon be- coming a vertical plate fusing with the ethmoid and inter-orbital sep- tum. Here also the obliteration of sutures is complete. The vomer is present but inconspicuous. The maxillaries form the sides of the beak and, in connection with the premaxillary, form a continuous bony ceiling to the roof of the mouth, which is covered with a thick horny sheath, so thickened on the edges as to make the knife-like cutting tomia. The palatals are movably articulated to the edges of the max- illaries by broad bases so that they nearly meet on the median line and reach nearly to the jugal, externally. Posteriorly, the palatals extend into forked processes, making the whole length .40 of an inch. From xo BULLETIN OF THE LABORATORIES this process, which descends below the level of the jugal, a nearly ver- tical plate extends upward to form a sliding sheath which clasps the presphenoid and plays back and forward upon it. The flattened ends of the long (.50) pterygoids are fused with these vertical plates by ex- panded, overlapping plates. There are two curved flanges springing from the point where the pterygoids unite with the palatals. The eth- mo-turbinal plates are more or less ossified and are seen on either side of the rudiment of the vomer. The pterygoids are stout but very unusually long and, on account of the size and position of the quad- rate bones, are quite distant from the basis cranii. Near the point of union of the pterygoid with the quadrate bone, a small hooked process, about . 12 long, extends upward from the former bone. What the use or the homologies of these processes may be, we do not know, although they occur in finches and in other birds. At the posterior of the two mandiblar processes of the quadrate bone is a bone as large as the head of a large pin, but of irregular shape, which may be regarded as either a sesamoid contributing to lock the jaw or an independent portion of the quadrate. There is also a very minute sesamoid at the union of the quadrato-jugal and the quad- rate. The lower jaw shows no evidence of its composite character. The whole anterior half is enlarged and forms a simple trough of can- cellous bone which may be assumed to consist of the dentary elements of both rami. The surangular, angular and splenial elements of the rami are not distinguishable. The articular portion consists of a huge flange, extending inward and upward and is perforated at the middle of its inner surface for the entrance of Meckel’s cartilage. What corresponds to the surangular portion is a broad triangular plate extending upward inside the jugal bones and serving to further lock the jaw. Thus, as we have seen, the whole skull is modified in harmony with the enormous rhinencephalic development. The hyoid arch is well developed and consists of seven bones, whose homologies, in the present state of our knowledge, cannot be made out. The anterior pair are pointed before and behind and at- tached at the middle to each other and the end of the azygos bone which next follows. The first mentioned bones are called entoglossal , by Gegenbaur, by some American authors, ceratohyals , with no real evidence that they are homologous with the bones so called in other ani- mals, The following element may be called basihyal ( copula of Gegenbauer,) and is flattened to form a vertical plate and bears on OF DENISON UNIVERSITY. 1 1 either side, posteriorly, the cornua, which each consists of one straight shaft, .50 long, and a shorter fusiform segment. Between these the urohyal extends backward as a support to the trachea. The atlas and axis are fused together more or less fully. There is no neural spine on the atlas, but its dorsal surface is perfectly plane. The axis, or second cervical vertebra, has a well developed spine and posterior zygapophyses and also a very large haemal spine, which curves back- ward. The third cervical has a smaller neural spine and its poste- rior zygapophyses project upward. Its haemal spine ( hypapophysis) curves forward. There is a slight inferior lamella of its transverse process. The fourth cervical introduces a new type, having a low spine, nearly horizontal posterior zygapophyses, and elongated styloid inferior lamellae. It has a smaller haemal spine. The following cer^ vicals have no neural or haemal spines, the posterior zygapophyses de- cline, and the styloid appendages are very long. The thirteenth and fourteenth (last) cervicals have pleuropophyses (ribs), those of the former being mere rudiments, while those of the latter are large but have no connection with the sternum. These vertebrae, in common with the first of the dorsals, have strong haemal spines. They also have the capitula process well developed to receive the head of the rib. The transverse process has its normal tubercular facet to sus- tain the tubercle of the rib. There are six dorsal vertebrce, which are more or less firmly co-ossified. The transverse processes are large and the spines of uniform size. The last dorsal is firmly united with the following nine vertebrae, which form the vertebral framework of the sacrum. Seven free vertebrae follow, forming the free caudal series. Each of these has a strong transverse process and a more or less perfect neural spine. Upon the last two there are also haemal spines. The last bone or pygostyle is remarkable for the great devel- opment of its neural spine. The sternum is normal for the group and is 1.20 inches long. The keel is well- developed, being .50 high. The mid-xiphoid process is .40 wide at the end. The lateral xiphoids are separated by an excis- ion one half as wide and rather more than .40 deep. The transverse sternal angle (that between the two sides of the body of the sternum,) is sharp and considerable. The costal processes are strong, while the coracoid grooves are .25 in width. The manubrium is particularly large and is bifid. Each of the six ribs, as well as the last cervi- cal rib, has a well developed uncinate process. 12 BULLETIN OF THE LABORATORIES The strongest bone in the shoulder girdle is the coracoid , which is expanded below and obliquely winged for a short distance, then is cylindrical and then curves inward, throwing off a flange-like process where the scapula is articulated, and ends in an articular surface against which the flattened upper part of the clavicle is pressed. From the lower angle of this surface a strong tendon passes to the process of the manubrium on that side. The clavicles are of the usual form, forming the merry-thought in connection with the anchylosed interclavicle. The scapula is united to both clavicle and coracoid and with the latter furnishes a glenoid surface for the humerus. Between these three bones, at their union, is a cavity, fora- men triosseum, permitting the passage of the tendon of the sub-cla- vius muscle. The anterior extremity is of moderate size. The humerus is .95 long and is much expanded proximally where it is .33 in breadth. The radial crest is short and quite prominent. The ulnar tuberosity is very large and outwardly presents a large triangular surface and within excludes two extensive fossae, divided by a strong septum, from the end of which a strong process is developed. The opposite or distal end of the humerus is less highly developed, but still shows a high degree of perfection of the spinous appendages. The trochlea, consisting of the radial and ulnar tubercles, are about as usual. The radial condyle is a small prominence directed forward at the base of the radius, while the ulnar condyle is a larger acute process, extending in the opposite direction. The radius , the smaller bone of the arm, is but slightly curved and measures 1.20 in length. The ulna curves considerably, proximally, so that the sigmoid cavity is quite oblique to the shaft, and the olecranon process is small and styloid. The carpus contains two bones which have the usual positions. The ulnare is applied to the back side of the ulna and rotates upon its smooth articu- lar surface. The radiale caps the ulnar and is overlapped by the ra- dius in front. The three metacarpals are fused at the base. The first one can not be distinguished and its phalanx measures but . 20. The second metacarpal is .65 long and is fused at both ends with the slender third metacarpal. The s.econd digit consists of two phalanges, the first of which is .30 long and consists of two bars connected by a thin plate of bone, the second being a triangular plate .15 long. The third digit consists of a styloid phalanx .20 long. (The two ossicles described by Schufeldt, in certain birds, as the cuneiform and the pen- tosteon, are not discoverable in any of the skeleta before me. OF DENISON UNIVERSITY. T 3 The pelvis is papery and yet very complete. The obturator fissure, separating the ischium and pubic moiety of the pelvis is divided into an elongated posterior and smaller circular anterior foramen. The ilio- siatic foramen is quadrate, with rounded angles. The pubic bone is produced into a slender curved process, as usual in this group. The femur is .91 long and nearly straight and requires no description. The tibia is a symmetrical straight bone, 1.30 long, while the fibula is nearly free from it and is about half its length. In the skeleta of adult birds, such as those before us, it is useless to attempt to distin- guish the tarsal bones which unite with its epiphyses, thus forming the tibio-tarsus , nor yet the composition of the succeeding segment of the leg, the tarso-metatarsus. The latter is .80 long and is furnished with a strong process ( ‘ ‘ calcaneal,” ) behind, which is at present causing so much discussion. The subdivision at the distal extremity into the four metatarsals is distinct. The first of these, the hallux , is provided with a separate matatarsal, the accessorius , which is quite large and de- scends to the level of the other united metatarsals. The phalanges of the hallux are two in number, the first being very large, .32 long. The claw borne by the following phalanx is the strongest on the foot. The second toe has three phalanges, the third, four, and the shorter .fourth, five, as is the case in all of the present group of birds. Such a bare description as is above given of points in the osteology of a species of bird, is of little value, except as furnishing a basis for comparison with others of its own and other groups. Such a com- parative study we cannot at present attempt, but may, perhaps, profit- ably note some points of difference between the present species and others of its own family, Fringillidae. Quite at the other extreme of the family may be found the genus Pipilo, which is represented in our region by the Chewink or Ground Robin, P. erythvopthalmus , a bird of singular appearance, in some points resembling the Orioles, while mimicking the habits of the Brown Thrush. A comparison with this species then may be expected to give us the limit of divergence in structure within the family, and those points which are identical in both may, with some probability, be assumed to be of family, ordinal or class rank. The skull is of very different form, but the' differences are chiefly those accompanying the reduction in the size of the beak, which in the Chewink is slender, almost Icterine. This slender point- ed beak does not extend backward so far as in the true Finches, but BULLETIN OF THE LABORATORIES 14 the malar pillar is much longer and the angle of the beak and the end of the tomia are forward from the orbit. The opening of the nares is much larger and the lachrymo-nasal space is a very large tri- angular opening. On this account the ascending process of the max- illary is quite slender. As seen from above, the skull of Pipilo is much narrower between the orbits and the facial portion of the skull is easily distinguished from the cranial. Th§ orbits are rather larger and not nearly as well guarded. The lachrymal is of the same shape, but lacks the long slender process directed backward, below. The lachrymo-nasal foramen is small. The interorbital septum is very poorly developed, two oblong foramina extending longitudinally leave but a narrow bridge between them. The ethmoid is therefore greatly reduced. The back of the skull is alike in both, but the opening of the bullae is directed more forward. The palatal bones are quite sim- ilar, but the posterior processes are not bifid. Two curved slender rods, which seem at least partially ossified, pass from the palatal pro- cesses of the maxillary to that part of the palatals farthest forward and highest. The pterygoids are of the usual shape and are flattened an- teriorly to slide over the sphenoids The quadrate is smaller and of the same form, but has a rather longer orbital process, proportionally. The quadrato-jugal has the same hamular process posteriorly as described in the Grosbeak. The lower jaw is, like the upper, rather weak.. The various parts entering into each ramus are indicated by the pres- ence of a large oval foramen separating the surangular, angular and splenial, and the flange of the articular is large. The differences in the shoulder and arm are slight and are such as might occur in species of the same genus. The sacrum is relatively much stronger and the spinous armature is greater, this corresponding to the greater demand upon the muscles there finding origin. The foramina are of the same number, but the lower one is more elongated to correspond to the greater development of the pubic bone. The femur is of ordinary form, but the tibiotarsal segment is greatly enlarged. The fibula is quite well developed and is anchylosed with the tibia about one -half an inch from the head, for a short distance, but is free above and be- low. The head of the tibia develops two huge processes and there is a small patella. The condyles are very large. The “calcaneal” process, strangely enough, is very small and poorly ossified. The foot itself is not particularly enlarged. The form of the sternum is very closely alike in these birds ; in OF DENISON UNIVERSITY. 15 \ fact, the sternum is a valuable osteological index, for, not only is it pretty constant in a given family, but it presents points of constant difference between many families. The manubrium is larger, if any- thing, than in the Grosbeak. Such are some of the differences noted between these species and they may be taken as indications of those points in the osseous struc- ture most readily responding to changes in habit or habitation as in- duced by changes in the environment. It is by the elimination of the variable elements of different degrees of constancy that classifica- tion can be placed upon a permanent and correct basis. The vari- able points may be employed in distinguishing species, genera, etc., in accordance with their relative permanence or value. Plate I. Anatomy of Hespe.riph.ona. Fig. 1. Lateral view of entire skeleton. Fig. 2. Skull seen from below. Qj, quadratojugal ; PI, palatal ; pt, ptery- goid ; sp, sphenoid ; e , condyle ; Fm, foramen magnum ; L, internal flange of mandible. Fig. 3. Transverse section of skull. V, vomer ; Q, quadrate bone ; Of, optic foramen ; other references as above. 3 A, diagram of bones of skull. Fig. 4. Quadrate bone and articulations. Pi, pterygoid ; Qj\ quadratoju- gal ; a, accessory ossicles ; m c, sheath of Meckel’s cartilage. Fig. 5. Iiyoid arch. Fig. 6 . Superior surface of a cervical vertebra. Fig. 7 . Humerus. Fig. 8. A dorsal vertebra, from behind. Fig. 9. Muscles of the wing seen from above. Fig. 9 A. Anterior part of wing from below. Fig. 10. Skull denuded of skin and showing certain cervical muscles. METAMORPHOSIS AND MORPHOLOGY OF CERTAIN PHYLLOPOD CRUSTACEA. [Plates V — VIII and Plate X.] The group Phyllopoda is one of the most remarkable among crusta- ceans, on account of the peculiar form and life history of most of its members. About the animals of this group there clings a certain air of mystery which may lead one to regard them as almost “ uncanny.” A pool by the wayside is suddenly formed by a shower and almost in- stantly becomes populated with a swarm of animal life, which no one ever saw there before and for the like of which we might search an hundred miles in vain. In a few days the little tragedy is played and the uncouth actors have disappeared, no one knows whither, having sown the clay at the bottom of the now dry pool, with eggs which, under favorable circumstances, may again put the play on the boards,: but only after being themselves thoroughly dried by the sun. In short, in the study of these animals the unexpected is always appear- ing and known laws, or at least- theories, are again and again negatived. We calmly institute a species when, lo ! the change in certain condi- tions attending the development occasions the change to an entirely different genus in our system. (See V. Siebold, in Sitzungsberichte d. viath. -phys. Classe zu Muenchen , 1873, an( f the paper .by Schmankewitsch in the Zeitschrift fuer Wissenchaftliche Zoologk , XXV Suppl., 1875.) In spite of many able papers and works on American Phyllopods (notably the monograph, by Prof. Packard, in The Geol. Surv. Terr . , 1868, Part I, Sec. 2.) many points of deepest interest remain to be cleared up, and particularly such as relate to the development history and homologies of organs. In the present paper a few observations made some years ago, are presented with no attempt to discuss their bearing upon the questions in dispute. The student conversant with the literature of this subject will observe, however, that these facts