172 



MEMOIRS OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB. 



indicate that at least a few of these Grouse may have succeeded in maintaining themselves for a 

 number of years, but there are no good reasons for believing that any of them are still living or 

 have left living descendants. In short the attempt to establish them permanently in the Cam- 

 bridge Region, as well as in certain other parts of Massachusetts where they were liberated at 

 about the same time, has evidently proved a complete failure.] 



[Tympanuchus cupido (Linn.). Heath Hen. It is probable that Wood refers to this 

 Grouse when he speaks of the ' Hcathcocke' in his poetical enumeration of "fuch kinds of Fowle 

 as the Countrey afioords." The word occurs in the following line : " Thf. Tmky-P/te/ani, 

 Heathcocke^ Partridge rare" In the following text he says : "Pheafons be very rare, but 

 Heathcockes, and Partridges be common ; hee that is a husband, and will be ftirring betime, may 

 kill halfe a dozen in a morning." He adds : "The Partridges be bigger than they be in England, 

 the flefh of the Heathcockes is red, and the flefh of the Partridge white."' This indicates that 

 his ' Heathcocke ' must have been the Heath Hen, and his Partridge the Ruffed Grouse. What 

 his ' Pheafon ' was we can onh' conjecture. Apparently he was not personally familiar with the 

 bird and he probably learned of it through the Indians, who may have had the Spruce Grouse in 

 mind, or, perhaps, from white men who had been in Virginia, where the Ruffed Grouse was and 

 still is called ' Pheasant.' 



Josselyn asserts that "the Country hath " no " P/ieafan/s, nor Woodcocks, nor ^nai/s,"^ 

 but he mentions the " Partridge " which, he says, "is larger than ours, white flefht, but very- 

 dry, they are indeed a fort of Partridges called Groo/es."^ This passage relates, of course, to 

 the Ruffed Grouse. 



Morton's testimony on these points is so interesting that I give it in full. It is as follows : 

 "There are a kinde of fowles which are commonly called Pheifants, but whether they be 

 pheyfants or no, I will not take upon mee, to determine. They are in forme like our pheifant 

 henne of England. Both the male and the female are alike; but they are rough footed ; and 

 have ftareing fethers about the head and neck, the body is as bigg as the pheyfant henne of Eng- 

 land ; and are excellent white flefh, and delicate white meate, yet we feldome beftowe a fhoot at 

 them. 



"Partridges, there are much, like our Partridges of England, they are of the fame plumes, 

 but bigger in body. They have not the figne of the horfefhoe on the breft as the Partridges of 

 England ; nor are they coloured about the heads as thofe are ; they fit on the trees. For I 

 have feene40. in one tree at a time : yet at night they fall on the ground, and fit untill morning 

 fo together; and are dainty flefh. 



"There are quailes alfo, but bigger then the quailes in England. They take trees alfo : for 

 I have numbered 60. upon a tree at a time. The cocks doe call at the time of the yeare, but with 

 a different note from the cock quailes of England."* 



Despite what Morton says to the effect that its flesh was white, I am inclined to believe that 

 his 'pheifant' must have been the '•Heathcocke^ of Wood, which, as I have already stated, 

 was almost certainly the Heath Hen of later authors. The 'Partridges' mentioned by Morton 



' William Wood, New Englands Prospect, ed. 2, 1635,22-23,25. Charles Deane's ed., 1865, 



29. 30, 32- 



'John Josselyn, New-Englands Rarities Discovered, 1672,12, 13. E. Tuckerman's ed., 1865, 



46-47. 



^John Josselyn, Two Voyages to New-England, ed. 2, 1675, 99. W. Veazie's reprint, 1865, 78. 

 ■" Thomas Morton, New English Canaan, 1637, 70. Ed. C. F. Adams, Jr., 18S3, 193-195. 



