298 Letters, Announcements, t^c. 



Sir, — As very little seems to be known respecting the breed- 

 ing-habits of the Snowy Owl [Nyctea nivea), it may not 

 be entirely without interest to some of your readers if I send 

 you some particulars which I have lately received, together with 

 seven eggs — six from one nest and one from another — from a 

 correspondent at one of the Moravian missionary-stations on 

 the coast of Labrador. The nest, which consists of only a 

 few feathers, is generally placed on a ledge of rock where there 

 is a slight hollow, sufficient to prevent the eggs from rolling 

 out, but sometimes, in the absence of suitable rocks, on the 

 ground. The usual number of the eggs is eight ; these are not 

 all laid and brooded at one time, but the first two are often 

 hatched by the time the last is laid, so that you may find in 

 one nest young birds and fresh eggs, and others more or less 

 incubated. 



" In the case," my correspondent says, " of the nest I had 

 the pleasure of finding in this neighbourhood, from which I 

 send you the eggs, I waited till four eggs were laid, and then 

 took the first two I had seen. In a few days two more were 

 added to those left, which former I again took. So long a time 

 passed without more being added, I feared the two eggs I had 

 left would be nearly hatched, and took them away. For a few 

 days the birds remained near, and would probably have laid 

 again, but were disturbed by the Esquimaux.'^ 



I may add that in size the eggs I received are as nearly as 



possible the same one with the other, and the same also as a 



single egg I have, obtained through Mr. Dufi" from Lapland, 



and that they are a size smaller than the smallest eggs of any 



clutch of the Eagle Owl in my collection. 



I am. Sir, &c., 



Hubert S. Hawkins. 

 Beyton Rectory, March 18th, 1870. 



Sir, — I wish to off'er a few observations in reply to Ur. 

 Salvadori's letter {antea, pp. 153, 154). With regard to Larus 

 gelastes, he cannot possibly have seen the specimen to which I 

 referred; otherwise he could never have stated that a Gull labelled 

 by Prof. Doderlein as obtained in May or June, and suffused 



