THE BIRDS OF CACHAR. 565 
Ue (10) AcrocePHaLus acRIcoLA,—The Paddy-field Reed-Warbler. 
Hume, No. 517 ; Blanford, No. 367. 
Mr. H. A. Hole first drew my attention to the fact that this bird 
was not rare in Cachar, and since then I have received and collect- 
ed several specimens. It probably is ‘a permanent resident in Cachar, 
but I am not yet sure of this. 
160 (11) Pasyxtioscopus FULIGIVENTRUS.—The Smoky -Willow- 
. “Warbler. 
Flume, No. 525; Blanford, No. 409. - 
One of my collectors obtained a male of this species near Silchar in 
November, 18995, and I Hye shot a female in the hills the following 
January. 
178, CRYPTOLOPHA cawrator,—Tickell’s Flyoateher-Warhle, 
Hume, No. 576 bis ; Blanjord,’ ‘No. 438. 
I have several times met with this bird. re in N. Cachar. It is 
resident and I have taken its nest. 
178 (12) ABRORNIS SCHISTICEPs.—The Black-faced Flycatcher- 
Warbler. 
Hume, No. 511 ; Blanford, No: 441. 
On the 10th of May, 1899, “Shit crossing a tiny bridge over a 
streamlet running through bamboo jungle, I noticed: a ‘small bird 
perched on the top of a dead bamboo, not 5 feet: away from me. to 
the left. I at once saw that it was an Abrornis with a black face that I 
had not seen before in N. Cachar, and knew that it could be no other 
than the present species. From the way it stuck tothe bamboo for a 
second or so and then flew a few yards away, I thought-it had a nest, so 
looked into the bamboo and was rewarded by finding one. - The bamboo 
was one about 22" to 3" diameter, dead and semi-burnt, and was lying 
resting against a clump of living bamboos. Closé under one ‘of the 
nodes the bamboo had been burnt through and -was also split down- 
wards, in this hole just above the next node the nest was placed. For 
some six inches the bamboo was loosely filled with moss-roots and fibres, 
and on these lay the true nest, a lovely little mass of moss and feathers 
lined with the softest down. The eggs, four in number and: hard 
set, were exactly like those of A. superciliaris. I failed to get the 
bird itself, but am absolutely sure that my identification was correct, 
It was taken at an altitude of some 3,200 feet. 
