290



Correspondence.



and our Editor has published a valueless article, surely we are severally responsible

to the Soc : ety—not to Mr. Witherby. In this connection, however, I note that one

of our members claims, in the July number of the ‘ Magazine,' to have read the

article “with interest.”


The article in question was written in great haste on a journey, so it would

not have been surprising if it had contained some small inaccuracies, but, after

reading it again, I can definitely say that, to the best of my recollection, the

reminiscences it contains relating to the nightingale are accurate except in one

small particular. It might be inferred from one sentence that the late T. H.

Nelson came to Devon in quest of nightingale's eggs, but, as a matter of fact, he

came for a change of climate.


I see that Mr. Witherby describes my “story” as “ uncorroborated,” but

may I ask, on what grounds ? It is true that I only introduced two dramatis

pcrsonce in it, but there was a third person, and if Mr. Witherby will tell us exactly

what statements he considers require corroboration, I will ask that third person to

say that they are correct.


Mr. Witherby lays stress on the fact that he does not collect eggs, and would

not be likely to come to Devonshire to shoot nightingales. These may, of course,

be matters of interest to himself, but possibly they may not interest our readers,

and in any case they were not referred to in any way whatever in my recent

article.


The only allusion of any kind to Mr. Witherby was my remark that I

thought Nelson must have mentioned the locality of the nightingale’s nesting site

to him. Here also I was not speaking at random. Nelson went on from Devon to

London, and I asked him to convey a message to Mr. Witherby relating to the

annual looting of the eggs of certain very rare species by a certain collector, in the

hope that something might be done to stop it. Nelson subsequently wrote to me

that he had given the message, and at the same time asked if I would contribute

any data to an article on the distribution of the nightingale, which was to appear

shortly in ‘ British Birds.’ In the interests of our Devonshire nightingales I did not

accept the invitation. If Nelson did not mention the locality to Mr. Witherby he

probably did so to Dr. Ticehurst; in any case I feel nearly sure that the information

came from him, because the very words I used in describing the locality to him

were subsequently reproduced in ‘British Birds.’ There was, of course, no reason

why he should not have done so, because I have no recollection of having asked him

to regard the information as privileged, and I had been careful to describe the

locality only vaguely. As I mentioned, I now never give definite information to any

collector, having had some very bitter experiences, including the almost complete

destruction of a once flourishing colony of choughs.


One of the oddest statements in an odd letter is that “ Mr. D’Urban could

not have been ignorant of the locality.” When our readers recollect that one often

has no knowledge of the nesting of uncommon species in one's own immediate

vicinity, and then consider the size of Devonshire, they will be able to appraise this

suggestion at its proper value. The nightingale is dispersed over a large area of

Devon County, but it occurs only sporadically. If Mr. D'Urban had known of this

colony of five pairs nesting in a very small area, obviously he would have mentioned

it in his book, ‘ The Birds of Devonshire,’ but Chudleigh is only mentioned in the

latter as one among many sporadic instances of occurrence. If the information



