34 BULLETIN 17 9, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM 



but close together geographically. Since I have a "home town" pride 

 in them, plus the fact that they are ornithological history, they are 

 quoted herewith in full, and they constitute the most northerly nesting 

 of dominicensis. Audubon (1840) records the first instance, though 

 he himself did not observe the birds or the nest. He writes : 



After I had arrived at Charleston in South Carolina, on returning from my 

 expedition to the Floridas, a son of Paul Lee, Esq., a friend of the Rev. John 

 Bachman, called upon us, asserting that he had observed a pair of Flycatchers 

 in the College [Charleston] yard, differing from all others with which he was 

 acquainted. We listened, but paid little regard to the information, and deferred 

 our visit to the trees in the College yard. A week after, young Lee returned 

 to the charge, urging us to go to the place, and see both the birds and the nest. 

 To please this amiable youth, Mr. Bachman and I soon reached the spot; but 

 before we arrived the nest had been destroyed by some boys. The birds were 

 not to be seen, but a common King Bird happening to fly over us, we jeered 

 our young observer, and returned home. Soon after the Flycatchers formed 

 another nest, in which they reared a brood, when young Lee gave intimation to 

 Mr. Bachman, who, on visiting the place, recognised them as of the species 

 described in this article. Of this I was apprised by letter after I had left 

 Charleston. * * * The circumstance enforced upon me the propriety of never 

 suffering an opportunity of acquiring knowledge to pass, and of never imagining 

 for a moment that another may not know something that has escaped your 

 attention. 



Since that time, three years have elapsed. The birds have regularly returned 

 every Spring to the College yard, and have there reared, in peace, two broods each 

 season, having been admired and I'espected by the collegians, after they were 

 apprised that the species had not previously been found in the State. 



Young Paul Lee deserves more credit than he ever received, for had 

 it not been for his persistent visits to Dr. Bachman the knowledge 

 .might well never have gone farther than his own conviction that 

 he had seen something unusual. 



The College of Charleston occupies a city block bounded by St. 

 Philip, George, Green, and College Streets. There are many very 

 large oaks in the "yard," and the nests must necessarily have been at 

 considerably gi'eater altitudes than those usually utilized by this 

 species. This illustrates the tendency of the gray kingbird to return 

 to the same tree "or clump of trees," as Weston points out. Since 

 Bachman's day, no further instance of the nesting has occurred there ; 

 at least none has been noted. 



Many years elapsed before the gray kingbird was seen again in 

 coastal South Carolina, this time by William Brewster and Arthur T. 

 Wayne. Wayne (1910) prefaces his account of this record as fol- 

 lows: "Since Audubon wrote, I have been the next observer who has 

 seen and taken this rare species in the State." It so happens that 

 Wayne was in error here, though the record previous to his and ISIr. 

 Brewster's was not made known publicly until many years afterward. 

 Herbert Ravenel Sass, of Charleston, who was once connected with 

 the newspaper business, and who conducted a nature column in the 



