91 
home. On returning next day, both nestlings were found dead and 
cold, out of the nest. I replaced one of them; but the Cuckoo made 
no effort to get under and eject it, but settled itself contentedly on 
the top of it. All this I find accords accurately with Jenner’s de- 
scription of what he saw. But what struck me most was this: 
The Cuckoo was perfectly naked, without a vestige of a feather, or 
RAG A BD 2 
ih {(K = yp 
even a hint of future feathers ; its eyes were not yet opened, and its 
neck seemed too weak to support the weight of its head. The Pipits 
had well-developed quills on the wings and back, and had bright 
eyes, partially open; yet they seemed quite helpless under the mani- 
pulations of the Cuckoo, which looked a much less developed creature. 
the Cuckoo’s legs, however, seemed very muscular, and it appeared 
to feel about with its wings, which were absolutely featherless, as 
with hands, the ‘spurious wing’ (unusually large in proportion) 
looking like a spread-out thumb. The most singular thing of all was 
the direct purpose with which the blind little monster made for the 
open side of the nest, the only part where it could throw its burthen 
down the bank. I think all the spectators felt the sort of horror and 
awe at the apparent inadequacy of the creature’s intelligence to its 
acts that one might have felt at seeing a toothless hag raise a ghost 
by an incantation. It was horribly ‘ uncanny’ and ‘ grewsome.’ ” 
A few words more on this subject. My friend Mr. Noble, of Park 
Place, Henley-on-Thames, wrote to me thus on the 4th of May, 
187] :— 
