4458 THE ZooLoGcist—May, 1875. 
for entomological purposes, when in an oak wood I discovered a teal’s nest con- 
taining eleven eggs. The locality of the nest was made known by the exit of 
the hen bird, which flew off, just over the tops of the fern, in an apparently 
crippled and broken-winged condition to a brook about three hundred yards 
distant. The nest itself was placed amongst a large tuft of heather and 
brambles, the whole overshadowed by a small oak tree. The sides of the 
nest were of moss, and a sprinkling of lichens, all of which were woven 
together into a compact mass with an abundance of down from the parent 
bird. The inside of the nest, which seemed to be built in a slight 
depression in the ground, was lined with dead leaves and fern; and my 
feelings may be better imagined than described as I contemplated the 
beautifully constructed nest—almost reminding one in form, and at a casual 
glance, of the nest of the chaffinch—and the eleven lovely eggs which it 
contained. I took six of them, but was very careful not to disarrange the 
nest, lest the old bird should forsake it. I may state that the eggs were quite 
fresh. I did not visit that part of the forest again until the 12th of May, 
when curiosity led me to the spot where I had found the previously-admired 
nest, but was greatly surprised to find it torn to atoms, and the materials 
all heaped together in one common ruin. On taking up some portions of 
the nest I found three of the eggs amongst it; the other two had entirely 
disappeared. What could have been the cause of such a demolition? If 
it was a birds’-nest hunter he certainly would have taken the remaining 
eggs; if the parent bird had torn her nest to pieces she would as certainly 
have left the whole number of eggs; or if a stoat, or other depredator of a 
like nature, had been there, is it not possible that the whole number would 
have been sucked, and that the shells of those missing would have been 
found near? Such, however, was not the case, as I searched for them 
unsuccessfully for some considerable time. I may state that an unusual 
number of wild ducks were to be met with in the forest during the breeding . 
season, but whether the peace secured to them by the “ Wild Birds Protec- 
tion Act” was the cause of such abundance I am not prepared to say; 
certain it is that prior to its enactment ducks and other wild fowl were 
most unmercifully slaughtered at almost any season, and especially when the 
“ flappers ” were just able to get upon the wing.—G. B. Corbin. 
Coot near Ringwood.—Within my short ornithological experience this 
species has become much more common in this immediate neighbourhood. 
Some of the older writers on British birds—notably Bewick—speak of it as 
somewhat uncommon, and instance the depredations of some of the faleon 
tribe amongst the young coots as a possible, if not probable, cause of the 
scarcity of the species. We well know that many of the hawks are becoming 
scarcer every year, and that some are nearly or quite extinct, and it would | 
be interesting to know whether the loss of the birds of prey has, in any 
marked degree, made a difference in the number of those species upon 
