112 THE ZOOLOGIST. 
their length ; the dark bars, however, are apparent. The feathers on the 
back and the rest of the upper parts have very slight black spots towards 
the tips, and no bars except on the wing-coverts. No. 5, from Guernsey 
(unfortunately not dated), is in nearly perfect adult plumage, a very slight 
tinge of rufous on the head, the only other indication of its not being fully 
adult being traces of dark bars on the inner webs of the tail-feathers, except 
the two central ones; these are, however, very distinct, though not 
reaching across the web. Although not dated, this bird was probably shot 
in December or January, for Mrs. Petherick, the local taxidermist, had one 
brought into her shop during the last week of December in nearly identical 
plumage. No. 6, killed in January, is in nearly perfect adult plumage, a 
very slight tinge of rufous on the head, very slight spots—they can 
scarcely be called bars—of black on the inner webs of the outer tail- 
feathers, only near the foot of the feather. This bird may, of course, be of 
the same year as No. 5, the dark bars gradually disappearing as the breeding- 
season draws on. On the upper parts the dark marks are entirely confined 
to the triangular spots near the tips of the feathers; there are no dark 
bars even on the wing-coverts. My other skins are No. 7, an undoubted 
adult female from Guernsey, not dated. No. 8, a female, killed in 
December, shows some traces of blue on the rump and tail-coverts; with 
this exception the appearance of the upper parts is decidedly that of the 
female, the dark markings being much broader and more regular than in 
the youngest male of the series. The last of my series of skins, No. 9, 
killed in Guernsey, but not dated, seems rather an exceptional bird, almost 
amounting to a variety; it is pale all over, and particularly pale and mealy 
on the rump and tail-coverts ; the tail-feathers also are pale, though slightly 
tinged with blue towards the body; the dark bars on the two central 
tail-feathers are little more than spots, not reaching either to the shaft or to 
the outside edge of the feather. I should call this a young male in its first 
-January, though for some reason the blue has not been developed on the 
rump and tail-coverts, which are of a pale whity-brown. Taking this series 
throughout (the dates where given I know to be correct), it would seem that 
No. 1, killed in January, was in its first January, and had completed its first 
moult, there being no old or worn feathers about it. No. 2, killed in May, 
would be in its first May, thatis to say nearly, if not quite, ayear old. No. 3, 
killed in August, would be in its second August, and consequently rather 
more than a year old. No. 4, killed in March, would be in its second 
March, and therefore within two months a year older than No. 2. There is 
a gap between Nos. 4 and 3, especially as to the tail, but No. 5, having 
gone through the autumn moult, might account for this, otherwise there 
would be another year to account for; anyhow, it could not be younger 
than its third August. No. 6 would be a month older again. It seems 
to me that all these gradnal changes in plumage caunot be accounted 
