Correspondence, Notes, etc. 187


as well as fly, and the Budgerigars once let loose have to be left to their

fate and can defy nets.


To be quite precise, and to make myself thoroughly clear, I will

quote the following figures :


(1) The former abominable and long since condemned cages for

small finches at the Zoo. measured : Back 12 inches, front 15 inches high,

width 14 inches, depth 10 inches, cubic contents i|- foot.


Ordinary Canary cages, such as are in use everywhere, measure about

14 X 10 x 14 high, or about the same cubic space.


That both these are to be condemned for use at a Zoological Garden

needs no discussion, but that is no valid reason why cages should be con¬

demned altogether.


What are called “drawing-room aviaries,” in which often a dozen

and more birds are kept, are 30 inches wide, 16 high, and 13 deep. When

divisible into three compartments by the insertion of two wire partitions

they have a dome, and including the dome the extreme height is 30 inches.

The total cubic contents of such a cage without the dome would be 3! feet,

with the dome about 5 feet, divisible into three compartments.


The measurements of the four specimen cages, as suggested by me

and now in use in the Insect House at the Zoo., are:


(1) Cage for a pair of small Doves or foreign Thrushes or Starlings-

(at the time of writing tenanted by a small Toucan) 36 inches wide, 24 deep,

24 high. Cubic contents 12 feet.


(2) Cage for birds of the size of Goldfinches, 36 inches wide, 18 deep,

18 high. Cubic contents 6f feet, divisible in case of need into two of 3| feet

cubic space each.


(3) Cage for pairs of very small foreign finches, 36 inches wide, 16

deep, 15 high. Cubic space 6| feet, divisible into two compartments if such

are needed, of over 3 feet cubic space.


(4) Cage for very small foreign birds in numbers of 6 to 20 of one

species, 36 inches wide, 18 deep, 36 high. Cubic space 13! feet ;i not divisible.


Such cages as here described under Nos. I to 4 my critics have called

“small cages” for small and very small birds!


If a gentleman desires to build a larger dining-room for himself and

a more spacious day-nursery for his children, he surely does not instruct

his architect to plan a dining-room as large as a restaurant or a play-room

as large as a riding-school.


And now that the readers of the Avicultural Magazine have fairly

heard both sides, they may perhaps, if they have time and inclination to do

so, re-read the first article which started the discussion in the January

number, and weigh for themselves which view they endorse.


Aug. F. Wiener.


Sir, —The discussion in our Magazine of aviaries versus cages has

interested me very much, and as I have been asked to send a few lines on



