HARDWICKE'S SCIENCE-GOSSIP. 



43 



insects and plants are to be found in these localities, 

 and shall be obliged to any one who will give me the 

 required information. — H. Morton. 



Nesting of Missel Thrush. — Can any reader 

 of Science-Gossip tell me whether it is rare or 

 not for the Missel Thrush ( Tardus viscivorits) to 

 build its nest on the tops of walls ? I found a nest 

 in May, 1S72, on the top of a wall, — it had four eggs 

 in it, and the female was sitting on it ; and another 

 in May, 1876. — Jas. Iugleby. 



Blackbird and Thrush. — About the middle of 

 April, hunting round the garden, I found a nest 

 nearly finished, which I thought belonged to a black- 

 bird, though I could not catch sight of the female 

 bird. Two days after, looking into the nest, I found 

 four eggs, all just like a blackbird's, except that one 

 egg had the deep claret markings of a thrush : the 

 female being still very wary, had flown away before 

 I could see her. Two or three days after I again 

 visited the nest, and found that the bird sitting was a 

 thrush ; she was then very tame, and, showing no 

 signs of fear, let me watch her, standing within a 

 few feet of her nest. The last week in April the 

 eggs were hatched. I was unable to watch her again 

 for about ten days, when, to my regret, I found 

 that only one young bird remained ; the old bird was 

 then very restless, flying round and round her nest, 

 but never going more than ten yards from it, and 

 uttering incessantly a single low plaintive note. I 

 had then ample opportunity of watching her, aud can 

 state with certainty that it was a song-thrush ( Tardus 

 mitsicus). As soon as the young bird could fly at 

 all, both the mother and her offspring disappeared. 

 The blackbird was not nearly so assiduous in the 

 welfare of the young one as its mate, and I cannot 

 see why it should mate with a thrush when there 

 are plenty of blackbirds all round us. — G. T. B. 



Blackbird or Thrush. — In the November num- 

 ber of Science-Gossip I saw a notice, by "G. T. B.," 

 of Blackbird and Thrush. I have taken, at several 

 places, nests built like a blackbird's, but at the top of 

 a high fir generally (while blackbirds build near the 

 ground), containing eggs like a thrush's, but instead of 

 black spots, a few pale reddish ones. The nests were 

 lined with hay, not mud, as a thrush's, surrounded 

 outside with coarse pieces of stick and bits of fir or 

 grass. I have never seen the old birds, but I have 

 named them in my cabinet as produced by the mat- 

 ing of a blackbird and thrush. — S. S. B., Bradford 

 Abbas. 



Birds' Eggs. — In your number for September last 

 a correspondent gives a few reasons for " birdnesting," 

 which I think are open to the following objections. 

 To take them in order : — 1. Is it necessary that, to 

 obtain a knowledge of the situation and materials of 

 a bird's nest, the eggs need be taken ? Would not a 

 note, made on the spot, of the nest, its contents, 

 position, &c, without disturbing the eggs, be more 

 to the point ? 2. With respect to the many people 

 who take their only knowledge of ornithology from 

 the robbing of nests, I may venture to assert that, as 

 far as my knowledge goes, three out of four such 

 collectors take little or no interest in the birds them- 

 selves ; in some cases not even in the nest, the eggs 

 being all they look or care for. And of how much 

 value to science is the knowledge they thus acquire ? 

 3. There is certainly a great difference between taking 

 the eggs of domestic poultry and those of wild birds, 

 for in the former, domestication seems to have almost 

 eradicated their natural feelings (though even in them 

 there is some trace left, as is shown by their some- 



times concealing their eggs as much as possible, 

 laying in out-of-the-way holes and comers), but thai 

 pain is thus given to wild birds, there can be no 

 doubt, after one has heard the painful twitter of the 

 parent-bird whose nest is disturbed. 4. That the 

 taking of their eggs is necessary to keep the com- 

 moner species within bounds, I fail to see. In the 

 first place, if there were any fear of their becoming too 

 numerous, why should an Act of Parliament have 

 been passed to check this "practice"? On the 

 other hand, is there not a fear of causing the rarer 

 species to become extinct, for it is on them that the 

 brunt of this "practice " falls ? How many are there, 

 even of those who call themselves collectors, or 

 oologists, who only take what rare eggs they really 

 require for their own cabinets? How many resist the 

 temptation to take all the very rare ones they find, 

 when they are so easily exchanged, or when a friend 

 would ■ be so pleased to accept them ? Of course 

 there are some who do, but I am afraid they are 

 sadly outnumbered by those who do not, as reference 

 to your Exchange column any month will show. But 

 those of the commoner kinds are neither saleable nor 

 exchangeable, and therefore remain comparatively 

 unmolested, except by the veritable nest-robber ; and 

 the rarer a bird becomes, the more are its eggs sought 

 after. Another of your correspondents reminds Mr. 

 Van Dyck that there is a law which prevents the 

 shooting of many birds during the time of their stay 

 with us. May I be allowed to remind him that there 

 is also another, to prevent the robbing of their nests ? 

 As to the "fond remembrances of bygone days" on 

 which he lays such stress, could not they be brought 

 to the mind just as vividly by looking through the 

 note-book, the companion of such rambles (he 

 accuses Mr. Van Dyck of a crib : may I ask him if he 

 has not read the paper on " Birds' Egg> " in " Notes 

 On Collecting and Preserving Natural History 

 Objects"?), and would not the pleasure of searching 

 out the nest be rather heightened than otherwise by 

 leaving the eggs ; for he is hard-hearted indeed in 

 whom the plaintive notes of the mother-bird raise no 

 touch of feeling akin to remorse ? Then we are told 

 that alter a "few years' " earnest collecting (it would 

 be interesting to know how many eggs are usually 

 destroyed in a few such years) most "collectors" 

 are able to give "not only the name of the bird," 

 but an account of its habits, &c, with a "number 

 of interesting facts " ; but, as before mentioned, I 

 fail to see that it is at all necessary to rob the nest 

 of its eggs to obtain a knowledge of these "interesting 

 facts, " and if it were, to use a French expression, is 

 " the game worth the candle" ? In short, I do not 

 see that in ninety cases out of a hundred any object 

 is gained by breaking the laws of the land in this 

 particular, and cordially agree with the Editor in 

 wishing that all Natural History societies would 

 follow the good example set by the Woolhope Club. 

 — L. W. G. 



Singular Affection of a Hen. — We had a 

 hen, of the barndoor or common fowl breed, say 

 about two years old, which we purchased, with 

 another from the same brood, from a farmer in this 

 neighbourhood some months ago. It was observed 

 that the hen's eyesight was dim when we first had 

 her, but after a few weeks the sight seemed to leave 

 her altogether, and of course total blindness followed. 

 The fowl was fed by placing her food immediately 

 under or close to her, and she picked up sufficient to 

 sustain life. The other fowls seemed to take excep- 

 tion at the blind hen's company, and each one, with 

 one exception, constantly attacked her. The curious 

 part of the thing was, that the sister of the blind 



