174 THE ZOOLOGIST. 
Mr. Monk, of Lewes, has a case of Firecrests procured in 
Sussex, and very naturally mounted on a larch bough by the late 
Mr. Swaysland, and I have had two or three from Worthing and 
St. Leonard’s. I do not think Mr. Saunders is over the mark in 
stating (‘ Manual,’ p. 57) that it has occurred twenty times in 
Sussex, although there is a story of a bird-stuffer, now deceased, 
who sold one and the same Sussex Firecrest to ten customers! 
But apart from this there is no doubt that it has occurred very 
often in Sussex. 
Other counties in which the Firecrest has been taken are 
Oxfordshire, Yorkshire, Kent, Shropshire (four), Suffolk, Dorset- 
shire (six), Berkshire, Hampshire, and Devonshire,—in fact in 
all the Southern and in some of the Midland counties. 
The Scottish records, as Mr. Saunders justly remarks, stand 
greatly in need of confirmation. There is one record for Cum- 
berland (‘ Birds of Cumberland,’ p. 8), a bird killed with a stone 
and identified by the cut in ‘ Yarrell,’ but the cut does not show 
the distinguishing features well, and Mr. Macpherson is not able 
to trace the bird, on which accordingly no absolute reliance can 
be placed. 
Mr. Hancock states (‘Cat. Birds Northumb. and Durhan,’ 
p. 75) that the only recorded occurrence in Northumberland and 
Durham is an erroneous one; and with regard to three shot on 
one occasion out of a flock of Goldcrests in Lancashire, by the 
late Mr. J. Hardy (Mitchell, ‘ Birds of Lancashire,’ p. 19), I have 
a strong suspicion that these also may have been Goldcrests, 
knowing the way in which again and again the two species have 
been confounded, and the fact that the Firecrest is a visitor 
chiefly to the south of England. 
In ‘ The Zoologist’ for 1882 (p. 49) Mr. Phillips states that 
he has killed several in Breconshire ; but this I imagine is a 
mistake, for the only authenticated Welsh specimen, available at 
least for examination, is in the possession of Mr. EH, Bidwell, and 
it is therefore not unlikely that some fine male Goldcrests may 
in this instance have been mistaken for Firecrests. Mr. Phillips, 
with whom I communicated by letter, is of opinion that they 
were Firecrests, but it is remarkable what misapprehension still 
exists about the distinctive characters of these two closely allied 
species, though Mr. Harting has pointed out in the clearest 
manner (‘ Birds of Middlesex,’ p. 56) what these characteristics 
are, 
