9730 Birds. 



Another Specimen of the Gceat Black Woodpecker expunged from our British 

 Records. — With reference to the black woodpecker in the July number of the 

 'Zoologist' (Zool. 9626), Yarrell appears to be in error when he states that the black 

 woodpecker is claimed by Sibbald as belonging to Scotland. The paragraph runs 

 thus:— "Ex Picis Marliis, apud nos sunt, &c. Pici Marlii rostrum habent rectum, 

 &c. Digilos in pedibus binos ante et totitlem retro. Tnsectis solis vescunlur: Picus 

 viridis, Picus varius minor, Picus cinereus." Picis Martiis is evidently put for wood- 

 peckers generally, and the only three species named are, the green, the small spotted 

 and the cinereous (probably the nuthatch). A figure, however, of the black wood- 

 pecker occurs in a copy of Bewick's ' British Birds,' published in 1825, ludia proof, 

 without letter-press. — E. C. Buxton; Dareshury Hall, Warrington. 



Is the Great Black Woodpecker a British Bird? 

 By J. E. Harting, Esq., F.Z.S. 



I OBSERVE in the 'Zoologist' for July (Zool. 9626) your inquiry 

 for information relating to reputed British specimens of the great 

 black woodpecker; and I beg to call your attention to the fol- 

 lowing instances of its occurrence, which you do not appear to have 

 noticed. 



In a ' Catalogue of the Birds of Dorsetshire,' by Dr. Richard 

 Pulteney (London, 1799), the author stales that the great black 

 woodpecker [Picus mnrtius) has been obtained in that county more 

 than once, and refers particularly to one which was shot in a nursery- 

 garden at Blandford, and to another which was killed at Whitchurch. 

 His description is, " Body black ; cap scarlet," and there appears, 

 therefore, but little doubt that Picus martius is the bird referred to, 

 particularly as both P. major and P. minor are separately and dis- 

 tinctly mentioned in the same Catalogue. We are to assume that the 

 author had good grounds for making the statements above mentioned ; 

 in other words, that he had satisfied himself of the facts before 

 inserting them in his Catalogue. 



Colonel Montagu, in the Supplement to his * Ornithological Dic- 

 tionary,' after referring to the specimen stated to have been killed by 

 Lord Stanley, and which now appears to be a mistake (Zool. 9626), 

 continues, " We have heard that another was shot in the winter of 

 1805 on the trunk of an old willow tree in Battersea Fields." It is 

 observable throughout the whole of his work that Colonel Montagu 

 was not only an accurate observer himself, but was usually careful to 

 sift and prove the correctness of reports furnished to him relating to 

 the occurrence or capture of rare species. 



