FRUIT-SUCKERS. 



41 



mandible somewhat reddish ; feet brown ; iris -white. 

 Female above brown, with greyish centres to feathers 

 of head and back ; upper tail-coverts more rufescent ; 

 lesser and median wing-coverts brown, with a subter- 

 minal ashy bar ; greater coverts with a broader b'lr ; 

 bastard-wing and primary-coverts blackish ; flights 

 black, edged with bronze-green ; primaries with a white 

 spot at base, inner secondaries brown ; tail-feathers 

 dark bro'wn, slightly rufescent tielow ; crown of head 

 like the back ; lores and feathers round eye blackish ; 

 ear-coverts blackish-brown ; cheeks and under surface 

 dull white, partly washed with rufous ; throat, breast 

 and sides of body mottled with 'brown; thighs dark 

 brown ; under wing-coverts centred and edged with 

 brown, those near edge of wing entirely dark brown ; 

 axillaries brown at hase ; bill bhick, dusky yellow at 

 gape; feet black; iris white. Hab., Himalayas from 

 Cashmere to Sikhim, Dacca, and Assam, through Burma 

 to Tenasserim. 



Even lip to 1890 this bird was associated with the 

 Glossy Starlings, but in Oalt's' edition of Hume's 

 "Nests and Eggs of Indian Birds," p. 162, we read: — 

 " The esgs are so different in character from those of 

 all the Starlings that dnu'bts might necessarily arise as 

 to whether this species is placed exactly where it ought 

 to be by Jerdon and others. I |X)ssess at present only 

 three eggs of this bird, which I owe to Captain Hutton. 

 They are decidedly long ovals, much pointed towards 

 the small end. and in shape and coloration not a little 

 recall those of Myiophoneus temi/vinrki. The eggs are 

 glossless, of a greenish or greyish-white ground, more 

 or less profusely speckled and spotted with red, reddish 

 brown, and dingy purple. In two of the eggs the 

 majority of the markings are gathered into a broad 

 irregular speckled zone round the large end. In the 

 third egg there is just a trace of such a zone, and no 

 markings at all elsewhere. In length thev vary from 

 1.03 to 1.08 and in breadth from 0.68 to 0.74." 



Jerdon writes of it : " It frequents the valleys about 

 Simla and Mussoore-e, up to 6,000 feet, lives in small 

 flocks of five or fix; 'its note and flight,' says Hutton, 

 'arc very much like those of Slurnns vulgaris, and it 

 delights to perch on the very summit of the forest trees. 

 I have never seen it on the ground, and its feed appears 

 to consist of berries. It nidificates in the holes of trees, 

 lining the cavity with bits of leaves cut by itself ; the 

 eggs are usually three to five, of a delicate pale sea 

 green, speckled with blood-like stains, which sometimes 

 tend to form a ring near the larger end.' Dr. Adams 

 says that it frequents rice fields, or the sides of moun- 

 tain streams, and that it is shy and timid." ('' Birds o( 

 India," Vol. II., pp. 336-7.) 



In July, 1902, Mr. E. W. Harper, who also presented 

 this bird to our Zoological Gardens, wrote to offer me 

 a specimen, which reached me on August 1st. Mr. 

 Harper informed me that he considered its affinity to 

 the Starlings very doubtful, and this naturally incited 

 me to try to discover, by watching its habits in cap- 

 tivity, what birds it most closely resembled. Mr. Harper 

 had already pointed out that it was " a hopping bird, 

 and did not use its mandibles as dividers after the 

 manner of Starlings." 



I fed the bird as I do other fruit-eating species, but 

 it was very weak, and not in particularly good 

 plumage ; nevertheless, it was e.isy to see that it in 

 no respect behaved like a Starling. It always flew 

 direct to the feed vessel, and immediately began to 

 feed, piercing the fruit with slightly-opened m.nndibles, 

 between which the tongue was alternately inserted and 

 retracted ; it ate very little soft food, but the whole of 



the fruit supplied to it. In all these points its behaviour 

 corresponded exactly with that of a Bulbul, and, in an 

 artiile which I pubiiehed iu The Avicvltural Maijazine 

 for December, lb02, I expressed the belief that its. right- 

 ful pla,fe was with that group of birds. 



Unhappily the bird did not gain strength, but died 

 on September 25th ; I therefore sent the body to the 

 Natural History Museum, in order that Mr. Pyeraft 

 might study its anatomy, and thereby decide as to its 

 natural ]X)sition. I wa;-< much interested to hear that 

 he decided in favour of its relationship to the Bulbuls. 



Knowing that Colonel Charles Bingham was familiar 

 with the si>ecies in its native haunts, I asked him, 

 without stating my own belief, what he considered tlie 

 Sjx)tted-wing to be. His reply was: — "Undoubtedly 

 a Bulbul ; it agrees with the Bulbuls in almost all its 

 actions when at liberty." 



I therefore do not hesitate to place the Spotted-wing 

 here, instead of among the Starlings. 



Chloropsis. 



Although this genus seems somewhat related to tho 

 Bulbuls, its members are so utterly dissimilar, both in 

 colouring and form, that I have always objected to 

 calling them Bulbuls. In general aspect they remind 

 one of the Honeysuckers. and for this reason 1 propoi^ed 

 (■' Foreign Bird-keeping," P.irt 1, p. 17) to call them 

 Fiuit-suckers. As I then pointed out, they were 

 formerly placed in the Meliphagidie by Bonaparte and 

 Gray, and were regarded by Blyth as somewhat allied to 

 the Honeysuckers, though stiucturally they are much 

 nearer to the Bulbuls. 



Mr. Frank Finn {The Avicullui-al Magazine, 1st ser., 

 Vol. VIII., p. 86) proposes, three years later, that they 

 shall be called " Harewa," a name by which they are 

 known to the natives in India (but which to us has no 

 meaning) ; meanwhile my name for these birds has 

 caught on, and is now very generally adopted. Mr. 

 Finn considers these birds to l)e a link between the 

 true Bulbuls and the Babblers. 



With regard to the food for the species of Chloropsis, 

 Mr. Finn says they " are very easy to keep, devouring 

 soft fruit and insects with equal avidity, and lapping 

 up sweetened milk-sop with great gusto." 



Some years ago I knew a gentleman who spent much 

 money in importing these birds, which he fed exactly 

 in the manner above suggested, and speedily lost them 

 all. The late Mr. Abrahams, wJio saw them with me, 

 said that the milk-sop treatment never suited them, but 

 that they did well upon potato and egg chopped up 

 together, with fruit and a few mealworms. 



Tliat whicli suffices to keep a bird in health in India 

 does not answer at all in this country. Or we might 

 keep half our in ectivorous birds upon peameal and 

 maggots, which (according to what Jerdon tells us) 

 seem to be, to all intents and purposes, the staple foods 

 for Indian insectivorous birds. In any case, a com- 

 bination of milk and more or less acid fruit, does not 

 commend ifcelf to me as a likely food to keep a delicate 

 biid in health, consequently I should not try it myself, 

 particularly after seeing how speedily three or four 

 lovely specimens of Chloropsis became ill, and died 

 TV hen thus fed. 



Although I have on several occasions had the chance 

 of purchasing at least two species of Chloropsis, the 

 deaths which I had heard of made me nervous of giving 

 the necessarily high price for these lovely birds, or 1 

 should certainly have fed them precisely as I do my 

 other fruit-eating insectivors. 



