360 THE ZOOLOGIST. 
former year—Mountain Linnets (Linota flavirostris). On May 380th a 
Cuckoo’s egg was detected in a nest, and in a day or two a young one was 
hatched. The egg was nearly like those of the foster-parents ; just a little 
longer or perhaps a little larger, with the general colouring of the other 
eggs. The nest altogether contained four eggs. The first day after 
hatching the young Cuckoo (a weak creature) was in the nest, while two 
young and an addled egg of the foster-parents were lying near, but had all 
disappeared by the following day. The young Cuckoo, which had less down 
than the other two, could not have evicted them; but who evicted and who 
carried away it is impossible to tell. The same care and attention was 
given this one as the other described in 1897, and on June-22nd it flew 
away from the nest, and was seen three days later still attended by the 
foster-parents. This went on to the 7th July, that being the last occasion 
on which it was seen. This bird was remarkable for the uniform darkness 
of its plumage. On June 22nd the second one was found in a nest- nearly 
one hundred yards from the other. It was about half-grown, and the four 
eggs of the foster-birds were found lying in a small hollow such as might 
be made by a bullock’s foot. They were about three feet from the nest and 
chipped, either through the young birds having been about to emerge from 
the shell, or, as is just possible, had been removed by the bill of a bird, and 
received the marks that way. It is difficult to understand how they could 
have all been ejected by the young Cuckoo and rolled so regularly together 
by themselves. On July 7th this bird was seen moving about at a short 
distance from the nest, and returning to it again. On July 9th it had 
deserted it, but the foster-parents were still moving about near the nest, 
while the three were seen for some days later flying about in the vicinity. 
It seems probable that the Cuckoo would place her egg in nests of birds 
whose eggs are at different stages of incubation. Would it be too much to 
suppose that the eggs in this case had been set apart to feed the young one ? 
They were destroyed because they might have attracted Hooded Crows or 
similar depredators, otherwise it would have been interesting to note whether 
the young Cuckoo would have used them for food. The colour of this 
Cuckoo was extremely rufous, the plumage being in strong contrast to the 
other one; whilst the bird of 1897 was between the two in this respect. It 
is fairly reasonable to suppose that the eggs had both belonged to one bird, 
more especially as it is well known that some days elapse between the pro- 
duction of each egg of the Cuckoo. We had no means of ascertaining the 
sex of either of these birds, as colour does not denote it ; so we must find 
other reasons for so great a variation in colour which these two presented. 
As observations of these birds were practically of daily occurrence, it was 
remarked that there were no appearances of the old Cuckoo being about ; 
still the latter might put in an appearance at night or in the morning when 
¥ Ss% \4: r 
poe Co Be en) Lee 
