570 
Letters, Extracts, Notices, fyc. 
Although I heartily deplore the destruction of such orna¬ 
mental visitors as the Hoopoe and the Avocet, and of such 
residents as the Chough and the Bearded Tit, I cannot 
entertain the same feelings in regard to the shooting of 
examples of such species as the Melodious Warbler. I do 
not think the passing observation of a species not easily 
identified should be accepted as sufficient evidence of its 
occurrence, except in a few cases. For instance, I have seen, 
and heard, as I believe, the closely allied H. icterina on two 
occasions in Sussex, but until the bird has been obtained 
I cannot ask others to accept my identification. 
Yours &c., 
W. Ruskin Butterfield. 
4 Stanhope Place, 
St. Leonard’s-on-Sea, 
28th May, 1900. 
New Fossil Bird from the Stonesfield Slate .—At the 
meeting of the Geological Society on March 21st last, 
Prof. Seeley described a supposed new fossil bird from the 
Stonesfield Slate as follows : — 
During his residence at Oxford the late Earl of Ennis¬ 
killen made a collection of Ornithosaurian bones from 
Stonesfield, which was acquired by the British Museum in 
1866. Among these is one identified by the author in 1899 
as the right humerus of a bird about as large as a Flamingo. 
The bone is complete, except for fracture through the 
proximal articulation, and the specimen is, on the whole, 
well preserved. The chief characters available for com¬ 
parison are the form of tbe shaft, the character of the 
proximal end, especially the ulnar tuberosity and the radial 
crest, and the form of the distal end. The character which 
first showed the fossil to be a bird was the ulnar tuberosity; 
probably the Flamingo approaches as closely as any living 
genus to the Stonesfield fossil in this feature. The radial 
crest shows affinities with those of the Flamingo and the 
Eider-Duck. The impression left by the humero-cubital 
muscle on the external surface above the condyles is almost 
