Birds. 9363 
“sea snipes,” as they are called; it was brought to Cheltenham and stuffed very 
nicely by a Mr. White, of this town. The bird was of about the figure and size of the 
water ouzel, but with a much greater variety of plumage; it has a white breast, a 
pretty black ring round its neck, and the head and wings are of a brown colour. Mr, 
White, who “set it up,” pronounced it to be a dotterell or ringnecked plover. At 
Filey, in July, 1864, my son shot a bird of the same species, and exactly like the one 
above described, but the shopkeeper, who stuffed several other birds, pronounced this 
one to be a real turnstone: in consequence of having an exactly similar bird at Chel- 
tenham, I did not bring it with me. Probably Mr. White is right and Mr, Cordeaux 
also; to the latter gentleman I am exceedingly obliged for his observations on the 
Ornithology of Flamborough Cliffs. Mr. Cordeaux, on enquiry, will perhaps fiud that 
fifty years ago these cliffs were inhabited by ducks as well as cormorants; it is so 
stated in an old book which I read, whose date was nearly half a century back. I may 
be wrong about the sea-birds breeding in May, but an old inhabitant of Filey men- 
tioned to me that, in consequence of the nests being robbed of their eggs in May, an 
immense number of sea-birds deserted the cliffs about the end of that month, and 
returned about the end of June. My thanks are also due to Mr. Dobvée for his 
remarks on the indefatigable porseverance of the birds in no less than thrice trying to 
rear their young in one summer after having their eggs destroyed—H. W. Newman ; 
Hillside, Cheltenham, November 5, 1864. 
The Ruddy Shieldrake at Epworth—Mr. Samuel Hudson has been good enough 
to forward me coloured sketches of the ducks, whose occurrence has been recorded by 
him in the ‘ Zoologist’ (Zool. 9290) under the name of the ruddy shieldrake (Tadorna 
rutila, Pall.). Though these sketches are unfinished, it is manifest that the origiuals 
did not belong to that species, and I have little doubt, if any, that the drake was an 
example of the not unusual hybrid between the common wild duck (Anas boschas, 
Linn.) and the dusky duck (Anas obscura, Gmel.) of North America. I have in my 
possession at present a male specimen of this cross, which corresponds in all essential 
particulars with Mr. Hudson’s drawing of the male bird killed at Ashby. My speci- 
men was bred by myself at Elveden from a dusky drake, which, through Lord Lilford’s 
kindness, I received some ten years ago from Mr, C. Domville, of Santry, near 
Dublin, its mother beivg a common wild duck. For several seasons I reared brvods of 
these hybrids, the majority of which, being unpinioned, flew away at the ordinary time 
of migration. I do not wish it to be understood from what I now say that I lay any 
claim to the Ashby bird as being of my own breeding, for I know that several persons, 
the late Sir Robert Heron, for instance, have been successful in breeding the dusky 
duck, and it is only reasonable to suppose that the birds thus produced should have 
crossed with our common species, and have propagated other examples of this hybrid, 
which, according to M. de Selys-Longchamps (Bulletin de YAcadéemie Rvyale de 
Belgique, Tom. xxiii. 1856) is mentioned by Dr. Morton (Silliman’s ‘ American 
Journal of Science and Arts? March, 1847), as having been also observed in the 
United States. 1 must add that I am unable to perceive any great difference between 
the female bird represented in Mr. Hudson’s sketch and the female of the common 
wild duck; this may, however, arise from the unfinished state of the drawing.—Alfred 
Newton; Magdalene College, Cambridge, October 22, 1864. 
[Prior to Mr. Newton’s examination of Mr. Hudson’s very careful, though un- 
finished, drawings, they were in my possession, and I arrived at the conclusion that 
the male was Anas‘boschas, the common wild duck, in a transition state of plumage, 
