NOTES AND QUERIES. 267 



It will perhaps be remembered by some how much controversy was, in 

 1896, centred round the assertion I made {ante, 1896, pp. 101, 193, 256, 300, 

 302, 353) in connection with the St. Leonard's bird, viz. that the markings 

 were so distinct that I could distinguish the bird amongst a flock of Meadow- 

 Pipits with or without the aid of iield-glasses. After ray experience with 

 the Pipits here recorded, and increased observations here, and with other 

 Pipits in Iceland and elsewhere, I repeat my assertion with redoubled 

 emphasis. Any ornithologist who thoroughly educates his eyes to the 

 outlines and general appearance of our native birds in the field ought to be 

 able to distinguish between A. pratensis and A. cervinus in autumn or 

 winter plumage — giving, of course, a moderate range — without difl&culty. 

 The Pipits are certainly a puzzling class of birds, and resemble each other 

 closely in plumage ; but there is, in addition to their distinct songs, a 

 difference in build between them, which is most noticeable ; for instance, 

 the difference in build between A. trivialis and A. pratensis, when either 

 may be feeding in small flocks in a meadow in early spring, ought to be 

 clear to any acute observer without having to trust to the notes of the birds. 

 This difference in build is also very striking in other Pipits I have seen 

 abroad. I know that it must be most difficult for those who have to deal 

 chiefly with skins in a cabinet to appreciate this difference ; to do so there 

 must be a thorough acquaintance with the birds in the field. 



In conclusion, these two Irish examples of Anthus cervinus have 

 remained in my cabinet unrecorded for unavoidable reasons, and waiting 

 until I had an opportunity to send them to an authority to confirm my 

 identification. Recently Mr. 0. V. Aplin paid me a visit, and had no 

 hesitation in pronouncing them specimens of this bird ; and, as Mr. Aplin 

 has shot dozens of them abroad, and is well acquainted with their general 

 appearance and changes of plumage, his identification, added to the un- 

 mistakable descriptions of MiddendorfT, Bree, and Seebohm, may, I 

 think, be taken as settling the point. — F. Coburn (7, Holloway Head, 

 Birmingham). 



Rosefinch released in Devon. — Having to proceed to England on leave, 

 I took the opportunity of bringing with me some specimens of the Rose- 

 finch [Carpodacus erythrinus), in order to release them in England. Two 

 or three died on the voyage, and one escaped, out of the dozen I originally 

 started with ; but I was able to release the remaining birds from the train 

 soon after it left Plymouth on June 16th, and had the satisfaction of seeing 

 them go off strong on the wing, although they were not in very good con- 

 dition of plumage, and could mostly be easily recognized as captive birds if 

 shot by anyone at present. I did not like, however, to keep them longer, 

 as in the cage — a fairly large one — they did nothing but eat and fight, and 

 were getting grossly fat. I am sorry to say that all are males, females 

 being almost unprocurable in Calcutta this year. But as the female Rose- 



