214 COOPER’S FLYCATCHER— OLIVE SIDED FLYCATCHER. 
ascending toiler station, she occasionally quivered her wings and tail, erected 
her blowzy cap, and kept up a whistling, oft-repeated, whining call of pu, 
pu, then varied to pu, pip, and pip, pu, also at times pip, pip, pu. pip, pip, 
pip, pu, pu, pip, or tu, tu, tu, and sometimes tu, tu. This shrill, pensive, 
and quick whistle, sometimes dropped almost to a whisper, or merely pu. 
The tone is, in fact, much like that of the phu, phu, phu of the Fish Hawk. 
The male, however, besides this note, at long intervals had a call of eh phlbee, 
or h’phebea, almost exactly in the tone of the circular tin whistle or bird 
call, being loud, shrill, and guttural at the commencement. The nest of 
this pair I at length discovered in the horizontal branch of a tall red 
cedar, forty or fifty feet from the ground. It was formed much in the 
manner of the King-bird’s, externally made of interlaced dead twigs of 
the cedar, internally of wiry stolons of the common cinquefoil, dry grass, 
and some fragments of branching lichen or usnea.- It contained three young, 
and had probably four eggs. The eggs had been hatched about the 20th 
of June, so that the pair had arrived in this vicinity about the close of 
May. The young remained in the nest no less than twenty-three days, and 
were fed from the first on beetles and perfect insects, which appeared to 
have been wholly digested, without any regurgitation. Towards the close 
of this protracted period, the young could fly with all the celerity of their 
parents, and they probably went to and from the nest before abandoning 
it. The male was at this time extremely watchful, and frequently followed 
me from his usual residence, after my- paying him a visit, nearly half a mile. 
These birds, which I watched on several successive days, were no way 
timid, and allowed me for some time previous to visiting their nest, to in- 
vestigate them and the premises they had chosen, without showing any 
sign of alarm or particular observation.” 
I received from my friend the following additional account, in a letter 
dated September 12, 1833. “ Something serious has happened to our pair of 
the new Flycatchers ( Muscicapa Cooperi), which have for three years at 
least, bred and passed the summer in the grounds of Mount Auburn. This 
summer they were no longer seen. It is true they were not very well used 
last year ; for, in the first place, I took two of the four eggs they had laid, 
when they deserted the nest, and soon, within little more than a stone’s- 
throw, they renewed their labours, and made a second, which was also visit- 
ed ; but from this I believe they raised a small brood. The nest, as before, 
was placed on a horizontal branch of a red cedar, and made chiefly of the 
smallest interlaced twigs collected from the dead limbs of the same tree, in 
all cases so thin, like that of the Tanager, as to let the light readily through 
its interstices. An egg you have, which, as to size, so completely resembles 
that of the Wood Peicee, as to make one and the same description serve for 
