Brewster o?i a Collection of Arizona Birds. 14 1 
nor egg resembles that of S. ruticilla. But a greater’ surprise is 
the character of the nesting-site, which was 44 under a projecting 
stone, in a bank near a small stream.” This position is so unex- 
pected that, from an unproved collector, I should hesitate to 
accept the accompanying evidence of identification, which is a 
simple statement that the parent was sitting, and was distinctly 
seen. But knowing as well as I do Mr. Stephens’ unusual accu- 
racy and conscientiousness in such matters I cannot doubt the 
correctness of his determination, especially as the Painted Red- 
start is a bird of such striking colors and markings that it could 
not possibly be mistaken by one who is so familiar with its ap- 
pearance in life.* After all the case is not more peculiar than 
that presented among Hel ni in th oph ilcc by Lucy’s warbler wiiich, 
as has just been shown, departs from the normal nesting habits 
of the genus and builds in holes, behind loose bark and in aU sorts 
of unexpected places. The nest above described was taken May 
18,. when the eggs were sufficiently advanced in incubation to 
show that the clutch was complete. 
Mr. Henshaw comparing the sexes, says: “The adult plumage of the 
sexes differs little, though the coloration in the female is quite perceptibly 
duller throughout. The black is less lustrous ; the wings are blackish 
brown instead of pure black; the white on the wing confined to the cov- 
erts, and only just visible on the edges of the secondaries.” These differ- 
ences, however, are not always maintained for one of the two adult 
females before me is quite as bright as the average male, while the 
black is not less lustrous, and the white edging on the secondaries is 
even broader. The other is more like those examined by Mr. Henshaw, 
but seems to be peculiar in having the sides, with a broad collar across 
the nape, fine stone-grav. 
* A letter j 1 st received from Mr. Stephens contains the following very satisfactory 
confirmation of the above evidence. "The identification of your nest of S. picta is 
positive. I saw the parent plainly, and could easily have shot her. Indeed I should 
never have found the nest had not my attention been called to it by the birds flying 
from it as I brushed past almost within touching distance. When first found, the nest 
contained three eggs. I thought it be^t to leave them until next day to see if more 
might not be laid. * * * When I returned, however, the bird was not at home and 
as it was along, rough walk to camp, I took the nest, their being no occasion to visit 
the spot again. * * * The locality was a wide part of a canon between the two Santa 
Rita peaks, perhaps two miles from the top of the high ridge connecting them. Up 
this canon passed an old Mexican road to the pine timber above. It had not been 
used for many years. In its course it cut through an occasional projecting bank, and 
in one of these places was the nest. It was under a small boulder in the side of a 
nearly perpendicular bank, which was but two or three feet high. The vicinity was 
heavily timbered with oak and sycamore. I regard the position as exceptional : still, 
it may be the rule.” 
