The Red-Breasted Fly Catcher. 119 



and one of them, a female, was shot. Two more specimens 

 have since been obtained in the Scilly Islands, one in October 

 1863, and the other in November 1865. As these are the only 

 known instances of its occurrence in Great Britian, the 

 nesting of this species in Kent in the present year is a fact 

 that ought certainly to be recorded. I have taken care, there- 

 fore, to ascertain all the facts connected with these birds, and 

 these are now for the first time made public. 



The garden in which the birds built is a small one, not 

 more than about 70 feet square. The house to which it is 

 attached is on the west side of it, and on the north side is a 

 wall. In the garden, and only a few yards from the wall is 

 a Deodara tree, (cednis deodira) and in this the nest was 

 placed. It was about eight or ten feet from the ground, and it 

 was not placed in a hole in a decayed bough, or near the trunk 

 of the tree, as is said usually to be the case, but it was placed 

 some distance out, and towards the end of one of the branches. 

 The young birds left the nest on June 27th, and after that 

 nothing further was seen or heard either of the young birds or 

 the old ones. The nest was afterwards sent to me, and I have 

 brought it this evening for your inspection. It is rather larger 

 than one would expect the nest of this species to be, but that 

 is no doubt due to the fact that a brood of young ones has been 

 reared in it. I did not hear anything about these birds till 

 June 26th, and before I could go down to see them they had 

 taken their departure. The gentleman in whose garden they 

 were, is not a practised ornithologist, but he is a keen natura- 

 list, and a good observer; and as he saw the birds repeatedly, 

 generally on the top of the wall, and examined them carefully 

 through an opera glass, I do not think there can be any doubt 

 at all as to their identity. On one occasion he examined the 

 male through the glass, and compared him with the plate and 

 description in " Morris's British Birds," and on July 2nd I sent 

 him skins of the male and female of this species, which Mr. 

 H. E. Dresser very kindly lent me for this purpose, and which 

 are the identical skins from which the plate of this species in 

 his well-known work on the " Birds of Europe " were coloured 

 and described. Having examined these my friend expressed 

 himself perfectly satisfied as to the identity of the birds. There 

 is no species of bird which has occurred, or which is at all 

 likely to occur in Great Britain, which could be mistaken for 

 this Flycatcher, unless possibly it be the common Redbreast. 

 But the Redbreast is a much larger bird, and its note and move- 

 ments are very different to those of the Flycatcher. Further 

 than this, the Flycatcher has two conspicuous white streaks on 

 either side of the tail, which the Redbreast has not, and the 

 plumage of the male differs very considerably from that of the 



