1903 Correspondence 355 



Walton Cross. — " I enclose a photograph of Walton Cross, an old 

 relic situated about six miles from Huddersfield. I am unable to learn 

 anything of its history, but possibly some reader of the F. N. Q. may be 

 in a position to enlighten me." — Charles Mosley, 20 Moor End Road, 

 Lockwood, Huddersfield. 



Magpies. — "All poultry-keepers in this neighbourhood have suffered 

 much this year from the disappearance of chickens. The experienced 

 in this matter tell us that it is a magpie (one or more) that commits the 

 depredation, and one neighbour informs me that a gallina chicken was 

 taken by a magpie before his eyes within four or five yards from the 

 back door. The loss has been really serious, no brood wandering with 

 the hen-mother seems to be safe. I am told by a gamekeeper near 

 that he has shot many magpies this summer. In the only book of 

 reference upon the subject that I possess nothing is said of this pro- 

 pensity further than 'nothing comes amiss to it, but eggs and carrion 

 are preferred.' Probably more readers than myself would like some 

 information on this habit." — J. L., near Hereford. 



[Like all the indigenous members of the crow tribe or CorvidjE, the 

 magpie is almost omnivorous. Although the most conspicuous and most 

 attractive of the family, it is unfortunately true that the magpie is an 

 abandoned poacher, having a decided fondness for young birds, as well 

 as eggs and carrion. The late Lord Lilford observed a magpie feeding 

 on a dead donkey, an unusual sight from both points of view. But, 

 nevertheless, the staple food of this bird is probably worms, slugs, and 

 snails. Muirhead, in his Birds of Berwickshire, says, "that the game- 

 keeper has practically exterminated the jay and the magpie in parts of 

 the north," but in the woods of Herefordshire the magpies are in great 

 numbers. — Ed. F. N. Q.] 



Rutland Birds. — " In my notes on Rutland Birds, by Mr. R. Haines, 

 M.B.O.U., re the nightingale, I inadvertently quoted from the author's 

 article 'two pairs in the immediate neighbourhood of Uppingham,' 

 instead of 'one hundred pairs,' which words appeared in the original 

 article. Kindly allow space for this correction. 



" Respecting your footnote, I would say that all readers of the F. N. Q. 

 will, I think, admit the high excellence and interesting character of the 

 articles therein contained. If all magazines dealing with Natural Science 

 were equal to this, my remarks would not have been justified. Unfor- 

 tunately, however, I have before me a recent number of one of the most 

 authoritative magazines devoted to Natural History, in which a corre- 

 spondent seriously states that two species of British gulls (Larus) habit- 

 ually lay eggs in each other's nests, though the astounding statement is 

 unsupported by any evidence. Some day the study of Natural History 

 may be 'an exact science,' to-day one cannot say that it is." — W. 

 ( ,\ NGELL, Scarborough. 



[We are glad to insert the above correction and note, but would 

 point out to our correspondent that he was criticising an article in the 



