^O Brewster on Swainson's Warbler. [January 



took, so he assures me, with the exception of five others disposed 

 of elsewhere. The total number killed by us near Charleston in 

 1884 is accordingly just fifty. 



From the acquisition of so large a series in a single season it 

 might be inferred that Swainson's Warbler is an abundant bird 

 near Charleston. This, however, is certainly not the case. 

 Indeed, there is no present evidence to show that it is even com- 

 mon there except in a few localities, and the keenest collector 

 may cover miles of apparently suitable ground without finding 

 a single specimen. Mr. Wayne has had this experience repeat- 

 edly, while in no instance save one (when he fell in with a brood 

 of young accompanied by their parents) has he taken more than 

 three specimens in a day. His general success was simply the 

 result of the most persistent efforts extended over a period of 

 several months, during which almost his entire time was devoted 

 to the pursuit of this species alone. Most of his specimens 

 were taken in a somewhat limited area where, during the breed- 

 ing season, the females were spared that they might serve as 

 decoys to bachelor males. So successful was this plan that 

 in one instance no less than five males were shot to one female. 

 Many of these were doubtless attracted long distances. After 

 July, there was an appreciable if slight influx of young birds in 

 fall plumage. Some of them may have been reared near at 

 hand, but the majority evidently came from swamps further 

 inland or to the northward. This movement continued through 

 August, but at the close of that month it waned. The last speci- 

 men was taken September 25. Thus the stay of the species in 

 South Carolina would seem to extend over a period of a little 

 more than five months. 



The specimen killed on James Island, and another shot two 

 days later, about three miles to the westward of Charleston, were 

 the only ones met with in the immediate vicinity of that city. 

 Both were undoubtedly migrants, and it is probable that the 

 •sea islands' generally, with the adjacent mainland, are visited 

 regularly during the spring and fall flights. They may harbor 

 a few breeding birds also, but of this we have no present proof.* 

 On the contrary, after the migrations passed ^we failed to find 



* Since writing the above I have examined — through the kindness of Mr. C. K 

 Worthen — a specimen taken by Mr. Joseph H. Batty at St. Helena Island, South 

 Carolina, May 30, 1884. This date is fairly within the breeding season. 



