1448 The Zoologist — November, 1868. 



of their existence, and that he himself had seen them, but he evidently 

 knew no other name for them than ' king and queen murrs,'* which 

 he said the islanders called them ' because they were so big, and 

 stood up so bold-like.' In colour they were also like the ' razorbilled 

 murr.' Nobody, he said, had ever succeeded in catching or destroying 

 a bird, as far as he knew, because they were so close to the water, and 

 scuttled into it so fast. The existence of these birds had been 

 traditional on the island when he came to it, and even the oldest 

 agreed there were never more than two or three couple. He himself 

 never knew of more than one couple at a time." 



It is likely that the egg " precisely like a guillemot's in shape" was 

 really a double-yolk egg of that bird ; but the birds which the Lundy 

 people called " king aud queen murrs," " because they were so big, 

 and stood up so bold-like," may have been veritable examples of Alca 

 impennis; yet that A. impennis was ever a resident on Lundy Island 

 I think exceedingly doubtful ; Dr. Moore and his informant Mr. 

 Gosling evidently entertained no such idea ; in fact there is nothing 

 to show that its range during the breeding season extended south of 

 St. Kilda. 



With regard to Mr. Heaven's account, there is so much " finish " 

 about it that one inclines to suspect it has been all written from 

 memory. Now, although Mr. Heaven may make his statements with 

 the utmost good faith, no ornithologist will place very much con- 

 fidence in them ; for if the account be separated into, first, what is 

 only traditional, and, secondly, what actually came to Mr. Heaven's 

 personal knowledge, it will be seen to rest on next to nothing: the 

 fisherman who, in 1838 or '39, brought Mr. Heaven the monstrous 

 egg, went to live on the island twenty-five years before that time, and 

 even then the great auk's existence was traditional ; nevertheless the 

 fisherman supposes he saw one or more up to about 1823. What 

 are we to infer ? That the fisherman saw a real great auk ? that he 

 mistook some other bird for one ? or that he told an untruth ? Be 

 this as it may, the bird's ancient haunts know it no longer, and its 

 existence is now but a matter of tradition. 



It may not be out of place to give another reputed occurrence of 

 the great auk in Devonshire. A person at Plymouth often told Mr. 



* The " king ami queen ' were the titles bestowed by the fishermen on the great 

 auks at Papa Weslra : strange that this name should be persistent elsewhere. Query, 

 what besides the great auk merits the appellation ? 



