334 THE ZOOLOGIST. 



and several specimens were obtained. Though many Wheatears 

 appeared in the rays, very few came into actual contact with 

 the glass ; most of them, allured by the light, disappeared by 

 ascending over the dome of the lantern. I picked up only one 

 specimen. Probably several Eedstarts were in the same assem- 

 blage, but I identified only one beyond a doubt. None of the 

 above-named species appeared near the lantern until about 

 11.15 p.m. — that is to say, just as the sky became well overcast, 

 and the wind dropped from a moderate to a gentle breeze. The 

 direction of the wind throughout the night was west, and 

 drizzling rain began to fall at 1 a.m. : such was the state of the 

 weather till dawn. The birds continued to fly round the lantern 

 until the first indication of daybreak appeared in the east. 

 Having carefully compared the strange Lark with thirty-nine 

 Common Sky-Larks, I measured, weighed, and skinned them 

 all without delay. I left the Tuskar Light-Station on Saturday, 

 October 7th, 1911, and visited Mr. Ussher at Dungarvan. On 

 examining the bird he seemed definite in his opinion that it was 

 other than a Common Sky-Lark. On October 17th, 1911, we 

 re-examined the bird at the British Museum in the presence of 

 other ornithologists. The general opinion was that the bird 

 was either the Mediterranean or Asiatic form. Personally I 

 thought it resembled the Mediterranean form, and so pro- 

 visionally called it Alauda cantarella. In the ensuing March, 

 i. e. 1912, I published a paper in the ' Irish Naturalist,'* record- 

 ing the occurrence of this specimen. Two criticisms followed 

 regarding the validity of the species. One appeared in the next 

 issue (April) of the ' Irish Naturalist,' written by Mr. Barrington, 

 who stated that he " should hesitate to include this form [that 

 is, the Mediterranean Sky-Lark] in the Irish List, as it [my 

 bird] may be only a pale specimen of the Common Sky-Lark." t 

 With such a suggestion I could not agree, especially as there 

 were other distinctive characters besides shades of plumage, 

 which strongly suggested that the bird was not a Common Sky- 

 Lark. In a subsequent issue of the ' Irish Naturalist 'X I replied 

 to my critic in regard to these points. 



* Vide ' Irish Naturalist,' vol. xxi. March, 1912, p. 50. 

 t Ibid., vol. xxi. April, 1912, p. 84. 

 I Ibid., vol. xxi. August, 1912, p. 156. 



