13S 



Do Hawks drink? — Having seen an article in your interesting journal, vol. iii., page 135, . 

 regarding the fact of Hawks requiring drink, I beg to offer you the following remarks on the 

 subject, presuming that tbey may be interesting: — I caught a young Kestrel iu my garden in 

 September, 1853, wliich had escaped from some cottage children who had clipped his wings. The 

 bird is still alive, and doing well, is as playful as a Kitten, but cannot, of course, fly as yet, 

 as his wings have not grown. Since I have had him he has, on an average, completely got 

 into a large pan of water once a week, and remained in it sometimes as long as ten minutes, 

 thoroughly soaking every portion of his body by settling down and throwing the water over his 

 back with his wings; this he did even when the water had a coat of ice on it, during the 

 severe weather in January, but then only on a fine, clear, sunny day. I have frequently seen 

 him drink, as your correspondent says, exactly as a Common Fowl would drink. I supply him 

 regularly with raw beef, and as many small birds or mice as* I can get. A few weeks ago I 

 obtained a female Merlin which had its wing broken by a shot; I noticed it drink out of the 

 pan in the same manner. At the expiration of a week I was obliged to kill it, as it appeared 

 to pine with its broken limb. I gave the body to a friend, who has sent it, I believe, to the 

 Dover Museum, it being rather rare in this county.— A. H., Tenterden, February 27th., 1854. 



The Wrynech, (Yunx Torquilla.) — This morning I early discovered the Wryneck in our orchard, 

 March 18th., 1854. On referring to my calendar I find that last year I heard its cry on March 

 1st.; I saw it on the 5th. White records March 5tli. as the earliest period of his observing 

 it; and I think the date of last year worth registering, as we were suffering from very severe 

 cold and snows then; but with the present season, which is much milder, it is a much later 

 visitor.— G. 11. Twinn, Bawburgh Hill, Norwich, March 18th., 1854. 



Early Nesting of the JFood Pigeon, (Columba Palumbus.) — On Monday, March 20th., as I 

 was walking through a thick plantation of spruce firs, I was surprised to hear a Wood Pigeon 

 fly off a tree in the same manner as they do when they are nesting. On going up to the tree 

 I found a nest with one fresh-laid egg in it. This is surely very early. A little farther on, 

 in the same wood, I found a Squirrels' nest with two young ones in it. — J. J. D., West Grange, 

 Perthshire, March, 1854, 



On Leucophasia Sinapis and Vanessa Hampstediensis. 



Mr. Dale wrote to me some time since, asserting — 



1st. — That iu my "History of British Butterflies," I had, under the head of Leucophasia 

 Sinapis, figured two species, the other being Leucophasia Lathyri. 



2nd. — That I ought not to have included Vanessa Hampstediensis as a British insect. 



I demurred to either of my good old friend's inconclusive dicta, and think it necessary to 

 put forth my reasons for being "of the same opinion still" that I have been all along, 

 inasmuch as I gathered from his letters that he had been conveying to other persons an idea 

 that I had been mistaken in the above particulars; and also that he did not seem inclined to 

 own his error to those whom he had thus misled, nor to re-imbue them with the truth. I will 

 therefore, 'pro bono publico,' recapitulate the facts I pointed out to him. First, as to the 

 supposititious Leucophasia Lathyri i and. Secondly, as to the Vanessa Hampstediensis: — 



As to the former, he asserted that my left-hand figui-e, (as you look towards the plate,) 

 represented Leucophasia Lathyri, and that that species was to be distinguished from Leucophasia 

 Sinapis, in three particulars, namely, in its, {Lathyri) having, Firstly, the wings narrower; 

 Secondly, its shape on the outside hollowed instead of rounded; and. Thirdly, the under side 

 different, (this last particular being afterwards qualified into its being distinguishable by a 

 "practised eye.") 



To this I pointed out, beginning with the last-named particular, — 



Ist. — That my cabinet containing ten specimens of Leucophasia Sinapis, from two of which 

 the figures in the plate were taken, in none of them was there any appreciable difference from 

 the others in the under side. — This was not enough to convince him! 



2ndly. — That hardly any two of my specimens agreed in the shape of the wings, all the 

 others being intermediate, more or less, between the rounded oue, which he allowed to be Sinapis, 



