Connecticut, June, 1893, 
^A^u, \ X 
h 
/) 
// 
ra^L 
^ & %■ f %. \ 
1Z - ^ 47 '*■ * /? * 
/f 
l/\izi'ziltn" u- f 
•# 
V j ^ ’ ‘ K-VV'VV. VV> * 
w***- ^v v a-^>*^ j^j&V^vCT ^'-‘X i 
t^sZOXZ &\. ff-.A,^ 4^£j # 5-r-w 
Wv-^AA^X tAAjJ'-'Ly . / ^ V 
7 ‘«jt*t J/- •$>/ rVj^Ff ^LsA^!/H“VV 
(LAJL-U*? Kf-^V, 
ImwAvU) 
ur w*- “HWt-W r KA***s**’*4*$+*vy 
dX *> f\*~* $ \+ir&4^ 
/ 
tT ^ «-<7 
^7/jV. . *Wi~* 
WjC .a-v. iSfcy 
9 
‘Tax. 
/* 
Spizella pusilla wintering near Hartford, Conn. — This species seems 
to have some inclination to winter in this vicinity, as will be seen from 
the following data: While collecting Jan. n, 1886, I saw four, three of 
which I shot for positive identification. Jan. 26, of this same year, I saw 
another which was in company with a flock of Spizella monticola. I 
could not find them again during the winter of this year. On Jan. 20, 
1887, noticing a small Sparrow hopping around the door-yard I soon ap- 
proached it, and found it very tame, and noticed that it was a typical 
Spizella pusilla. This bird remained around here, during a very ‘ cold 
snap,’ until Jan. 26, after which it suddenly disappeared. From these 
facts, I think their stay here must have been voluntary, for the coldest 
weather failed to drive them away, and there were several seen at different 
times, which proves clearly enough that they were not all disabled birds.— 
Willard E. Treat, East Hartford, Comi&jx k, 4, July 1887. P. <£ 
A Note Concerning Bird Mortality.— On December 24, 1917, at 
Norwalk, Conn., while taking a Christmas census for ‘ Bird-Lore,’ I had an 
experience so unusual and interesting that I believe it worth putting on 
record. In the course of the morning I noted a Field Sparrow ( Spizella 
pusilla pusilla ) flying from one clump of bushes to another, and chipping 
rather excitedly. Not identifying it immediately I watched it for some 
time. It finally flew into the low hanging limb of a Norway spruce, and 
then dropped vertically down into a hollow in the snow, where I could not 
see it. The chipping noise ceased, and though I watched for some time, 
the bird did not reappear. I finally walked cautiously up to the hollow 
under the spruce limb, and found the bird lying upon its back. I picked 
it up. Every muscle in its body was rigid. Its feet were extended up 
straight and its eyes were open wide. Its breast was inflated as though 
the lungs were filled with air that it could not expel. Thinking it suffer- 
ing from cold, I tried to warm it in my hand. Soon its muscles relaxed, 
its eyes closed, its head drooped and it died in my hand. 
Dissection of the body later, showed no apparent cause of death save 
that there was little food in the stomach, a- condition that could not be 
considered abnormal early in the morning. But the stomach contained 
no small pebbles or grit, such as are generally present in the stomachs of 
seed-eating birds. There had been snow on the ground for several days, 
so that possibly the bird could not get such material, and this might have 
been the cause of death. The body was not in the least emaciated, how- 
ever, so that if this lack caused death, it was rather by something akin to 
acute indigestion than by starvation. The previous night had not been 
unusually cold, and weather conditions up to that time were normal. 57 
That afternoon I picked up a dead Song Sparrow ( Melospiza melodia 
melodia ) that had possibly met its death in the same manner. The number 
of birds that are found dead is larger than most of us realize. Last spring 
twenty-four birds were brought to me by pupils of the Bridgeport High 
School. The West Haven High School has a very good collection of 
mounted birds, nearly all birds that were found dead and brought in 
by pupils. Most of such birds that I have examined have shown no sign 
of injury. Probably many birds die in this sudden manner, but the 
chances of an observer actually witnessing such a death must be very 
slight. — Aretas A. Saunders, Norwalk, Conn. 
if / p . f *. uv - 
