116 MISCELLANEOUS NOTICES. 



ruginea and Unidcntaria would eventually prove to be one species, and last 

 summer I saw a series from the fens, in which there was every variation of 

 colour, from the bright red to the black band. Mr. Eddleston, who has taken 

 numbers of O. filigrammaria, seems positive that the Scotch specimens called 

 Autumnaria are identical with it." — Ed. 



Hfellnizeimis JMra 



Occurrence of the Parrot Crossbill, (Loxia pityopsittacus,) at Cheltenham. 

 — The occurrence of this rarely-observed bird deserves notice. The fact 

 was communicated to me by Nathaniel Skelton, an observant naturalist and 

 accomplished bird-preserver, residing at Cheltenham, in a letter, from which 

 I annex the following extract: — "In April last, (1857,) there was a small 

 flock of seven Common Crossbills about this neighbourhood. I found them 

 several times, and killed four. On Sunday, June 7th., I heard a Crossbill 

 calling in an apple tree. I saw it was a very fine red bird, quite alone. 

 I went round to the fir trees in this neighbourhood to look for it five 

 mornings following very early, and at last found it: it was alone as before. 

 I killed it, stuffed it, and put it away, and in the course of two or three 

 months after, I took it out and put it on a table with those killed in April, 

 when I saw it was a larger bird, and on consulting Yarrell's History, 

 it proved to be the 'Parrot Crossbill/ " From this it would seem that 

 the note is very similar to that of the Common Crossbill: on that point 

 Yarrell is silent. — W. V. Guise, Elmore Court, March 2nd., 1858. 



TO THE EDITOR OF "THE NATURALIST." 



I write to inform you that I have this day shot a specimen of the Golden 

 Plover in winter plumage in the marshes through which the Test runs in 

 this parish. Not having seen one in this neighbourhood before, and finding 

 no mention of this bird as occurring in Hampshire in your work on "British 

 Birds," or in that of Mr. Yarrell, I think it worth mentioning to you, as 

 I observe notices of such matters in "The Naturalist." — C. T. Maurice, 

 Michelmersh, Romsey, Hants, March 3rd., 1858. 



Oil-Gland of Birds. — I said in the July number, 1857, that I should 

 in a future one, make a remark on Mr. Waterton's "Essays in Natural 

 History," and I now proceed to do so. In the preface to the work he 

 states that he shall exclude all controversial matter, and yet subsequently 

 he gives his comments on my remarks on the Oil-Gland of Birds, and 

 omits all notice of my reply! True, I overturned his arguments, but if he 

 shrunk from exhibiting his defeat, he ought, even in any ordinary case, to 

 have kept back the observations which led to it, but how much more after 

 the pledge to the public he himself had voluntarily given. I am content 



