wooDcodfk. 
107 
the great diflference of size between the male and female, the 
latter being considerably the larger. 
The male Woodcock is ten inches and a half long, and six- 
teen inches in extent; bill a brownish flesh colour, black towards 
the tip, the upper mandible ending in a slight nob, that projects 
about one-tenth of an inch beyond the lower,* each grooved, 
and in length somewhat more than two inches and a half; fore- 
head, line over the eye, and whole lower parts, reddish tawny; 
sides of the neck inclining to ash; between the eye and bill a 
slight streak of dark brown; crown, from the forepart of the 
eye backwards, black, crossed by three narrow bands of brown- 
ish white; cheeks marked with a bar of black, variegated with 
light brown; edges of the back, and of the scapulars, pale blu- 
ish white; back and scapulars deep black, each feather tipt or 
marbled with light brown and bright ferruginous, with nume- 
rous fine zig-zag lines of black crossing the lighter parts; quills 
plain dusky brown; tail black, each feather marked along the 
outer edge with small spots of pale brown, and ending in nar- 
row tips of a pale drab colour above, and silvery white below; 
lining of the wing bright rust; legs and feet a pale reddish flesh 
colour; eye very full and black, seated high, and very far back 
in the head; weight five ounces and a half, sometimes six. 
The female is twelve inches long, and eighteen in extent; 
weighs eight ounces; and differs also in having the bill very near 
three inches in length; the black on the back is not quite so in- 
tense; and the sides under the wings are slightly barred with 
dusky. 
The young Woodcocks, of a week or ten days old, are co- 
vered with down of a brownish white colour, and are marked 
from the bill, along the crown to the hind-head, with a broad 
*Mr. Pennant, (Arct. Zool. p. 463.) in describing the American Wood- 
cock, says, that the lower mandible is much shorter than the upper. From 
the appearance of his figure, it is evident that the specimen from which 
that and his description were taken, had lost nearly half an inch fi’om the 
lower mandible, probably broken off by accident. Turton and others have 
repeated this mistake. 
