Suri
Pearse eT

Shere ecane teen cit
Shenae ere

pos = eat
reenter eet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SSS reel

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

CORNELL UN LV ERS I TY

 

The

WILLIAM D. SARGENT

Collection

 

 

 

ALBERT R. MANN
LIBRARY

AT

CORNELL UNIVERSITY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Recreations of a naturalist
RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST
 

 

NEW SCIENTIFIC BOOKS

TRAVELS OF A NATURALIST IN
NORTHERN EUROPE. By J. A. Harvis-
Brown, F.R.S.E., F.Z.S., Joint Author of ‘* Fauna of
the Moray Basin,” ‘‘ A Vertebrate Fauna of Orkney,”
etc., etc. With 4 Maps, 2 Coloured Plates, and
many Illustrations. 2 vols. Small Royal 8vo, cloth.
Limited Edition. Uniform with ‘‘Fauna of the
Moray Basin.” £3, 38. net.

THE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LIVING
MATTER. By H. Cuaritron Basrian, M.A.,
M.D. (London), F.R.S., F.L.S., Emeritus Professor
of the Principles and Practice of Medicine, and of
Clinical Medicine at University College, London.
With 76 Plates. Medium 8vo, cloth. 12s. 6d. net.

THE AGE OF THE EARTH, AND OTHER
GEOLOGICAL STUDIES. By W. J. Sottas,
LL.D., D.Sc., F.R.S., Professor of Geology in the
University of Oxford. Illustrated. Demy 8vo, cloth.
Ios. 6d. net.

HOW TO KNOW THE STARRY HEAVENS.
By Epwarp IrvInG. With Charts, Coloured Plates,
Diagrams, and many Engravings of Photographs.
Demy 8vo, cloth. 8s. 6d. net.

 

Lonpon: T. FISHER UNWIN.

 

 
 
RECREATIONS

OF A

NATURALIST

BY
JAMES EDMUND HARTING

AUTHOR OF
‘*A HANDBOOK OF BRITISH BIRDS,” ‘‘ EXTINCT BRITISH ANIMALS,

““THE ORNITHOLOGY OF SHAKESPEARE,”

 

WITH EIGHTY-ONE ILLUSTRATIONS

LONDON: T. FISHER UNWIN
1 ADELPHI TERRACE. MCMVI.
ot

28.

[All Rights Reserved]
CONTENTS

PREFACE

In Praise oF HAWKING

A MarsH WaLk IN May

THE WHEATEAR ON THE SOUTH Downs
PacHaM Harzsour PasT AND PRESENT -
DEER-LEAPS

ANTLERS

A Wet Day on THE HILL

THE Ways oF GROUSE

BLACKCOCK SHOOTING

THE DECREASE OF BLACKGAME

THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE RED-LEGGED PARTRIDGE
CaTCHING WOODPIGEONS

THE HorRsE AND ITS HISTORIANS

THE ORIGIN OF THE Domestic CaT
HUNTING WITH THE CHEETA
SHEEP-DOG TRIALS -

SWAN*UPPING

BIRD-LIFE ON THE BROADS

SomME SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY DECcoys

THE OLDEST Book ON FISHING

vii

PAGE

xill

13
27
41
63
74
84
92
IOI
108
113
129
138
145
170
178
185
201

213

222
Vill CONTENTS

FisHEs TRAPPED BY BLADDERWORT
FISH-EATING Bats

NaTURE STUDIES IN JAPANESE ART
Birps AND LIGHTHOUSES

Ture MIGRATION OF WooDCocKs
THE EvurRoPEAN Woopcock IN AMERICA
WHITE AND PiED WooDcocks

SNIPE AND THEIR DISTINCTIONS
TWENTY YEARS’ SNIPE-SHOOTING
CRANES AT CHRISTMAS

THE FascINATION OF LIGHT

THE Larcest BIRDS THAT FLY
SMALL BIRDS ON MIGRATION CARRIED BY LARGER ONES
Marcu Cuckoos

Cuckoo Spit -

SNAKES SHELTERING THEIR YOUNG
Tue MOLE CRICKET

THE SHAMROCK

THE MISTLETOE aS Foop For Birps
Birp-LiFE IN KENSINGTON GARDENS
THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THE KITE

INDEX

PAGE

230
234
247
258
278
286
292
298
395
312
320
33°
348
354
361
369
378
387
392
397
404
413
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

THE AUTHOR WITH a Cast or Hawks Frontispiece
THE Sparrow Hawk one
THe KESTREL 3
A MERLIN 5
THE PEREGRINE FALCON 6
A Younc GosHAwkK ah
A Hoopep FaLcon 9
FALCONER AND Hawks II
Tue MarsH IN May 14
THE REED BUNTING 15
THE YELLOW WAGTAIL 17
THE REDSHANK 19
THE BLACK-HEADED GULL 22
THE WHEATEAR 30
TrRaP FOR WHEATEAR 33
SNARE FOR WHEATEAR 37
THE CURLEW 42
THE DUNLING 44
THE SANDERLING 45
Punts ASHORE 47

THE TURNSTONE 49
x LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

THE SLUICE

THE GREY PHALAROPE

THE WIGEON -

Tue FowLer’s SHELTER

THE BRENT GOOSE

THE FowLer’s Doc

A TypicaL FaLtow Buck

An Exmoor StTac -

A “RovAL” FROM INVERNESS-SHIRE
ANOTHER ROYAL

A DowNHILL SHOT

A DrEap GROUSE

A Group oF BLACKGAME

THE RED-LEGGED PARTRIDGE
WoopEen Mummy Case FoR A Cat
A MumMIED Cat

AN EcyptiAN FowLer’s Cat
MECHANISM OF THE Cat’s CLAW
A WiLp Cat

WILD CaT SPRINGING ON ITS PREY
A MopERN VARIETY

THE CHEETA

Hoop For CHEETA

A ScotcH CoLiuir Doc

AN O.p ENGLISH SHEEP-DoG
THAMES SWANS

Tue Swan’s NEST

PAGE
51
53
55
57
59

67
75
77
89
gt
93
103
II5
146
147
149
157

167
169
173
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

NeEw.Ly HatcHEeD CYGNETS

THamMEs Swan Marks

Swan Marks IN PRESENT USE

THE REED WARBLER

THE SEDGE WARBLER

THE BEARDED TIT

THE Coot

THE GREAT CRESTED GREBE -

AN ANGLER OF THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY
Heap or WocrizLio LEPORINUS

Foor oF MocTILI0 LEPORINUS

SKULL OF WVocTILIO LEPORINUS

A JAPANESE CRANE

THE TREE SPARROW

A JAPANESE DRAGONFLY

Tue LIGHTHOUSE IN MIGRATION TIME
A Lost Woopcock

A Woopcock’s NEST

A Prep Woopcock

TaiL FEATHERS OF THE COMMON SNIPE
Tai, FEATHERS OF THE PINTAIL SNIPE
Tail FEATHERS OF THE GREAT SNIPE
Tait FEATHERS OF THE JACK SNIPE

A Heron FISHING -

A KINGFISHER HOVERING

THE LAMMERGEIER

THE CONDOR -

Xi
PAGE
193
195
195
204
205
207

209

228
241
243
245
249
254
256
261
281
283
295
300
301
302
393
325
329
335
339
Xli LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Tue WiLp Swan OR WHOOPER

THE WANDERING ALBATROSS -

THE BustTarD

THE CUCKOO -

Tue Cuckoo Spit anp INSECT (APHROPHORA BIFASCIATA)
THE ADDER OR VIPER

Tue Mo.Le CricKeT aT Work

Tue MOoLe CRICKET ON THE WING

THE KITE

PAGE
341
343
346
355
365
373
380
382
407
PREFACE

Near_y three centuries ago it was remarked by
Richard Brathwait, in his esteemed and now scarce
work, The English Gentleman, that recreations
might be of two kinds: those which give health
and strength to the body, as hunting, hawking and
the like, and those which refresh and stimulate the
mind, as when recourse is had to the use of books.
In a lengthy discourse on this subject, elaborated
with much argument and some anecdote, he
institutes a comparison between what he terms
‘““exercises of the mind” and “exercises of the
faculties of the body.” The notion even at that
date (1633) was by no means new. The unknown
author of that much scarcer book, The Iustitucton
of a Gentleman, first printed in 1555, asserted that
‘“‘good exercise and honeste pastymes doo muche
proffyt both to the healthe of man, and recreation
of hys wytte;” and after alluding to “ hawking and
hunting as pastymes used of gentlemen which, in
their right kinds, are good and allowable,” he

xiii
xiv PREFACE

proceeds to quote from Cicero’ to the effect that
indulgence in such sports and pastimes should
sometimes give way to graver studies.

The expression of these respectable opinions
may not inaptly serve by way of preface to the
present volume.

The essays here collected relate both to outdoor
and indoor recreations in the sense above indicated,
and the author can truly say that while devotion to
field sports has afforded him the chiefest pleasure
in life, he has sometimes derived almost as much
enjoyment—metaphorically speaking—in “finding a
hare” in the library, and hunting it through the
preserves of ancient authors until the hunt had a
happy termination, or the literary hare escaped to
give sport another day.

The majority of these essays were contributed at
intervals to the Natural History columns of Zhe
Field, and my acknowledgments are therefore due
to the proprietors of that journal for their courtesy
in permitting me to reprint them. They may be
said to form a second series of a similar collection
published some years ago with the title, Assays on
Sport and Natural History.

In regard to the illustrations, a few words are

1 “Non ita generati a natura sumus ut ad ludum et jocum

facti esse videamur, sed ad severitatem potius, et alia studia
graviora.”
PREFACE XV

necessary. While many of them were designed
originally for the articles in which they now
reappear, several have been supplied from other
sources, Those which adorn the “ Marsh Walk in
May,” ‘‘Pagham Harbour,” and “Bird-life on
the Broads,” together with ‘The Cuckoo” and
“The Kite” have been borrowed from Johns’
British Birds in their Haunts ; for although that
little book was published so many years ago that
the copyright has long since expired, the illustra-
tions by the master hand of Joseph Wolf still remain
the best of their kind, being veritable portraits of
the birds they represent.

For the cuts of the “Egyptian Fowler,” the
“Mummied Cat,’ and “Mummy Case,” which
appear in “ The Origin of the Domestic Cat,” J have
to thank Messrs George Bell & Sons, and to the
proprietors of Country Life 1 am _ particularly
indebted for permission to make use of half a dozen
illustrations from that journal, which have been
reduced in size, and adapted to present require-
ments.

The ‘Dead Grouse,” the ‘‘ Kingfisher Hover-
ing,” and ‘‘ The Largest Birds that Fly,” (pp. 335-
343), have been reproduced from original sketches
by Mr George Lodge, while Captain H. Hart
Davis has not only permitted the reduction of an
appropriate illustration (p. 91) from his Stalking
xvi PREFACE

Sketches, but has most kindly furnished an
additional cut (p. 89) from an original sketch of
his own.

In the production of all these, an effort has been
made to supply figures which are not only
appropriate to the text, but have the merit of
being accurate delineations of the species they
are intended to represent.

J. E. HARTING.

WEYBRIDGE,
November 1905.
Recreations of a Naturalist

IN PRAISE OF HAWKING

THERE is an old-world sound in the word “‘ Hawk-
ing” which carries one back to the days when
every treatise on English field sports, from the
Book of St Albans onwards, contained a chapter on
the art of falconry, and every man according to his
social rank had a particular kind of hawk assigned
to him. The humbler the falconer the more ig-
noble was the bird he carried; the most valuable
species, often imported at great cost from abroad,
being reserved for princes and noblemen, as befitted
their position.

To the former class belonged the Kestrel and
Sparrow Hawk, to the latter the Falcon gentle, the
Goshawk, and the Jerfalcon. Sothoroughly smitten
were our early kings with the love of hawking as a
recreation that stringent laws were passed to pro-
tect the eyries, or nests, and fine or imprisonment
awaited those who ventured to steal another man’s
hawk and refused to restore it to its rightful
owner.. Henry VIII., by an Act passed in the
thirty-first year of his reign, made it a felony to

1 tr: Hen. VII. cap. 17, repealed by 1 & 2 Will. IV.

cap. 32.
A I
2 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

take the King’s nestling falcons or eggs out of the
nest, or to capture any of the King’s hawks and

Vee aes ee : A

Z

f

 

THE SPARROW HAWK.

neglect to deliver them within twelve days to one of
the royal falconers.?

James I. gave great encouragement to field

131 Hen. VIII. cap. 12, repealed by the Statute Law Re-
vision Act, 1863.
IN PRAISE OF HAWKING 3

sports, and was particularly fond of hare-hunting
with beagles, and hawking. On the latter sport he
expended annually a vast amount of time and

Yj

 

A

THE KESTREL.

money, and was never so pleased as when he had
a few of the leading falconers of France to witness
some of the wonderful flights at the Kite with
Jerfalcons which Sir Thomas Monson provided for
him.
4 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

All the Stuarts were fond of hawking, but after
the Restoration the sport ceased to be popular.
The causes which led to its decline were many and
various. The disastrous state of the country during
the period of the Civil Wars naturally put an end
for the time being to the general indulgence in field
sports. The inclosure of waste lands, the drainage
and cultivation of marshes, the great improvement
in firearms, and particularly the introduction of
shot, all contributed to lessen the interest once so
universally taken in this sport. Fashion, also, had
no doubt much to do with the decline of hawking,
for so soon as the reigning sovereign ceased to take
an interest in the sport, the courtiers and their
friends followed suit. Nevertheless, it never en-
tirely died out, and from that time to the present it
has not ceased to be practised by at least a few
admirers of the old sport in different parts of the
country, while during the past twenty years indica-
tions have not been wanting of its increasing
popularity.

The general public have little opportunity for
seeing trained hawks flown, since the ‘‘meets”’ are
not advertised as in the case of hounds, and the
birds, therefore, are seldom seen, save in transit, by
any but the owners and their friends.

One by one the old professional falconers have
died out. John Anderson, John Pells, Peter
Ballantine, the brothers Barr, Adrian Mollen and
John Frost have all passed away, leaving only the
traditions of their craft to younger followers, who,
deprived of their teaching, have had to learn to
IN PRAISE OF HAWKING 5

train hawks by personal experiment, and begin de
movo to discover the secrets of a decadent art.
During the past twenty years the practice of
hawking in this country has received a great check
by the deaths of several notable falconers who, for

 

A MERLIN.

the greater part of their lives, did much to encour-
age the old sport and uphold its traditions. Such
names as those of Freeman, Salvin, Brodrick,
Willimot, Fisher, and the late Lord Lilford, are
‘‘household words” with the present generation of
falconers, and only those who, like the writer, had
the privilege of knowing them all, can fully realise

 
6 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

what a loss to the cause is implied by their
decease. Thanks, however, to the active members
of the Old Hawking Club, with their skilful falconer,
George Oxer, the old sport is still maintained, and
a goodly number of Falcons are trained every
year to show sport with Rooks on the downs in

 

THE PEREGRINE FALCON.

early spring, and game in the autumn. Many
others might be named who, although not members
of the club, follow its example and keep hawks of
their own in different parts of the country. Thus
the old sport is in no immediate danger of ex-
tinction, although it must be confessed that many
‘‘signs of the times” are by no means favourable
IN PRAISE OF HAWKING a

to its continuance. A wide extent of open country
is a seve gua non for flying long-winged hawks
such as the Peregrine Falcon and Merlin—and
this is becoming every day more and more difficult

 

A YOUNG GOSHAWK.

to secure. In the woodlands and more enclosed
parts of the country they would speedily be lost
owing to the height at which they fly, and the ease
with which they would pass out of sight, to say
nothing of the surrounding covert into which the
quarry would dash when pursued, to the disappoint-
8 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

ment of the hawks and their owners. But all
things in Nature have their appointed places, and
in an enclosed country, with proper management,
good sport may be obtained with short-winged
hawks like the Goshawk and Sparrow Hawk. For
these are flown from the fist after the quarry has
been flushed, and are not, like the long-winged
hawks, cast off to range at a great height before the
game is found. The Goshawk by nature will take
Rabbits, Hares, Pheasants, Partridges, Wild Ducks
and Water-hens, and may be trained to do so for its
ownersamusement. The Sparrow Hawk, also, will
take young Partridges early in the autumn, but
shows the best sport when flying at Blackbirds
and Thrushes in the turnip fields to which these
birds are in the habit of resorting in autumn.

Hawking, like other field sports, has its proper
seasons. In the early spring the falconer trains
the long-winged falcons to fly at Rooks, Carrion
Crows, and Magpies on the open downs. Towards
the end of summer the Merlin affords some pretty
flights at mounting Larks.

By the twelfth of August the falcons are once
more ready for the moors, and no more beautiful
sight can be witnessed than that of a high-couraged
Falcon ‘‘stooping” downward from an immense
height at a fast-flying Grouse and hurling it head-
long into the heather. The same bird also in
September will make equally short work of the
Partridges in a way that is perfectly astonishing
to those who are not familiar with the sight.
Besides game in autumn, young Wild Ducks may be
IN PRAISE OF HAWKING 9

killed with the hawks, and afford better sport than
“flapper shooting,” while rabbits, which, like the
poor, “are always with us,” afford flights for the
Goshawk at any time. Thus it may be said that
a man who is fond
of Hawks may find
something for them
to do for the greater
part of the year. As
to the method of
training them, to
enter into details
would require more
space than can be
here afforded. More-
over, I have already
devoted an entire
volume to the sub-
ject... Suffice it to
state that the prin-
ciples involved are:
first, to make a hawk
tame by handling
and feeding it, hood-
ing and unhooding
it, giving it proper
food, and water at intervals to bathe in;
secondly, to teach it to come to a lure to
be fed, increasing day by day the distance it
has to fly, at first with a line attached to the

 

A HOODED FALCON.

1 Fints on the Management of Hawks. Second Edition,
with numerous illustrations. Horace Cox, 1898.
10 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

jesses,! and then without it; thirdly, to enter the
hawk to the particular quarry for which it is
intended; and lastly, to fly the bird fasting and
reward it for killing, or for coming back to the lure
if the quarry should escape.

Here it may be well to add a few remarks
upon the charge of cruelty which is sometimes
brought against falconers by those who have no
acquaintance with the details of the sport. ‘‘It is
surely very cruel,” they say, ‘‘to let a poor bird be
torn in pieces by a ferocious hawk.” The answer
is, the poor bird is not torn in pieces, and the
hawk is not ferocious, but as gentle and docile as
any well-behaved dog that obeys its owner's wishes.
It merely exercises its natural instinct by killing
prey to appease its hunger, and kills it, moreover,
in a very merciful manner. Having struck down
with its talons the bird it pursues, it seizes it on
the ground with both feet, and while holding it
securely, grasps the neck with its beak, jerks it up
) suddenly with a sharp twist, and thus severs the
.spinal cord. The bird is, therefore, killed much
‘more mercifully and speedily than often happens
,when a Pheasant or Partridge has been brought
down with a charge of shot, and as a game bird
killed by a hawk is always put in the game
bag for future consumption by the owner or
his friends, it is a mistake to suppose that it
is torn in pieces by the hawk. Having seen
scores of Grouse and Partridges taken by trained

1The light leather straps that are fastened one to each leg,
the ends being attached to a swivel.
IN PRAISE OF HAWKING Tet

Falcons, I can speak with some assurance on the
subject.

There is unfortunately an element of cruelty in
every branch of field sports. Would it were other-

 

FALCONER AND HAWKS,

wise ; but if hawking were to be discountenanced
on that score alone, the days of coursing and fox-
hunting would likewise have to be numbered.
Every true sportsman, who is also a lover of the
beautiful in Nature, will avoid causing unnecessary
12 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

pain to the dumb creatures which contribute to his
sport, while providing him at the same time with
wholesome food. Where the cruelty comes in, is
in the use of such implements as the “pole trap,”
now happily prohibited by Act of Parliament, and
the iron ‘‘gin” employed for taking rabbits and so-
called ‘‘ vermin,” which provide no sport of any kind
to the user of them, and must inflict intolerable
pain.

If in the interests of game preserving hawks
are not to be tolerated in the neighbourhood of
grouse moors, or partridge manors, it is easy to get
rid of them in a more merciful way than by means
of an iron trap or a charge of shot. There are
several ways of taking them alive and uninjured for
the benefit of falconers or bird fanciers, and many a
gamekeeper, giving his attention to the subject, would
in course of time discover that a live hawk is worth
far more to him than a dead one. As many persons
profess themselves unable to distinguish one kind
of hawk from another, illustrations are here given
of the four commoner species which are most likely
to be met with, together with the Goshawk which
now seldom visits this country, and which, when
required by a falconer, has usually to be imported
from France or Germany.
A MARSH WALK IN MAY

For real enjoyment of a country walk, much must
necessarily depend upon the season at which it is
undertaken. In the woodlands, it is true, fresh
beauty may be discerned at almost any season of the
year, and the glowing, varying tones of autumn are
in their own way quite as lovely to contemplate as
the pale yet vivid tints of spring. In the marsh,
however, it is different, and for many months in the
year the landscape presents the appearance of a
dreary desolate waste. No trees to break the mono-
tony of the flat and flowerless fields, intersected only
by broad dykes, with here and there a footbridge
for the shepherds to reach their flocks; the inter-
minable plain stretches on and on till it meets the
dim outline of the distant sea-wall, or is lost in an
overhanging veil of mist. There are times, indeed,
as in the month of November, when the marsh
appears perfectly deserted. Not a sound is heard,
and there is hardly any sign of life. A few Larks in
scattered flocks rise at intervals in front of the in-
truder, a Reed Bunting or two in the dykes, and
here and there, like a dot upon the plain, a Grey
Crow may be seen busily employed, perhaps in
opening a mussel, or searching for the well-buried
larve of some beetle.
13
‘AVA NI HSUVA AIL

 
A MARSH WALK IN MAY 15

Long lines of yellow reeds mark the course of
the fen ditches, wherein, if he have luck, the shooter
may now and then flush a Snipe, or come suddenly
upon a skulking Duck and Mallard—his sole reward
for a long dull tramp in search of sport, unless per-
chance he should have the good fortune to drop
upon a covey of Partridges in the dry rushes, and

tf a

 

THE REED BUNTING.

secure a brace before they have placed a dozen
dykes between themselves and him. Six months
later all is changed, and the naturalist, who for the
first time essays a marsh walk, say in Kent, in the
month of May, will marvel at the transformation
scene presented.

As we step off the dusty road from Rye across
the marsh, over which the wind still sweeps keenly
16 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

from the sea, we catch sight of a littke yellow bird,
long and slender, moving rapidly to and fro, snapping
at insects as it goes, and pausing after every effort
to recover its balance, as it were, by a vigorous up-
and-down movement of the tail. Thisis the Yellow
Wagtail (AZotaczlla Rayz), which comes to us in
April and departs in September. The breast of the
cock bird looks as bright as that of any Canary, the
hen, though in close attendance upon her mate,
almost escaping detection from the comparative
sombreness of her plumage. In point of numbers
at this time of year, this little bird may be said
to be the commonest in the marsh, scattered pairs
coming into view at almost every hundred yards.
They make a skilfully concealed nest in a depression
of the ground, often upon the bank of a marsh dyke,
under shelter of some overhanging tuft, and lay five
eggs of a dull clay colour, which at a little distance
looks uniform, but which, upon close inspection, is
seen to be distributed in fine specks over the surface.
So inconspicuous is the nest, that, unless the birds
are watched to or from it, an hour’s search for it
might prove unavailing.

The common Pied Wagtail, so familiar by the
village pond side, is seldom seen upon the marsh in
May, not more than one pair for every hundred
of the yellow bird being visible. It appears to
prefer the neighbourhood of man’s dwelling, often
building its nest in ivy close to the house, and laying
a somewhat larger, whiter-looking egg, albeit it is
minutely freckled with grey.

Wherever the ground is hillocky, affording room
A MARSH WALK IN MAY 17

for temporary concealment, the Wheatear suddenly
appears and disappears. He is a timorous bird,
easily alarmed ; and on the warrens which he most
loves to frequent, he will often take refuge in a rabbit
burrow.

Some birds appear commoner in the marshes in
August and September, after the young are hatched,

 

THE YELLOW WAGTAIL.

than they doin May. The Meadow Pipit is one of
these. During the first week of September, when
in pursuit of Partridges, we may often see scores of
these little birds on the marsh, jumping up at
intervals almost under our feet, and hurrying off
with a spasmodic, jerky flight and sharp twittering
note. In May, however, only a few scattered pairs
are to be observed on the marsh, the majority having
gone further inland for the breeding season.
B
18 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

As we come to an angle of a dyke, where the
winter floods have scooped out a little bay and left
a small shelving bank of mud, we disturb a pair of
Summer Snipe (Zotanus hypoleucus), which go
skimming away down the dyke uttering a sharp
“weet, weet, weet.” They too are only passing
visitors, and do not breed here. We have found
their nests, with four pear-shaped handsomely
marked eggs, by the moorland streams in
Northumberland, Durham, and North Wales,
but never heard of their breeding in a south-country
marsh. They can swim and dive well on an
emergency, especially if shot at and wounded, or if
pursued by ahawk. Hawks, by the way, are not
common in the marshes in May, being away nesting
either in the woods inland, or in the nearest sea
cliffs many miles off. An occasional Kestrel,
however, may be seen hovering over the marsh in
search of food, intent probably in watching for the
reappearance of a water-rat upon a dyke bank or
the more easily captured Short-tailed Meadow Vole
(Arvicola agrestis). In winter the Merlin makes
its appearance, and has a good time of it amongst
the Larks and Meadow Pipits, occasionally trying
conclusions, not unsuccessfully, with a Snipe.

But the birds which of all others possess the
greatest interest for us in May are those which
resort to the marsh for breeding—the Peewit, the
Redshank, the Black-headed Gull. The Peewit, at
all times wary and suspicious, is especially so in the
breeding season, and rises with loud cries while we
are yet a long way from itsnest. Flying round and
A MARSH WALK IN MAY 19

round, and at times coming right overhead within
shot, it endeavours by every artifice to divert our
attention and lead us away from the spot where its
eggs or young are lying. The ground is still very
bare, and there is little or no nest; the eggs are
therefore not very hard to find, if the birds are first

watched from a distance. Those who make a

a . wy
|

   

 

THE REDSHANK.

’

business of collecting ‘“ Plovers’ eggs” for the
market, and whose eyes are well trained to the
work, have a wonderful knack of marking the
precise position of a nest from a distance after
watching the birds, and walking straight to it.
To do this, however, requires some practice ; the
eye must be steadfastly kept upon the spot once
marked, heedless of all the attempted distractions
20 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

by the parent bird. Amidst the sharp and pro-
longed ‘ pee-wit” uttered by some half dozen pairs
around us on the wing, we hear the very different
and more musical note of the Redshank—“‘teeou-
too, teeou-too-too”—and soon catch sight of one
topping a reed bed and flying, not unlike a Snipe,
away from the intruder As we proceed, another
and another starts up, one of which, hovering over
a post-and-rail fence, descends lightly on the top of
one of the posts, where it remains for some seconds
curtseying and nodding in all directions, until, at
our continued approach, it again takes wing, and for
a time disappears from view. The sight of so
many in this particular part of the marsh fills us
with the expectation and hope of finding anest, and
we have not far to search before discovering three,
distinguishable from those of the Peewit by having
rather more materials, moreneatly puttogether. The
eggs to the unwary are sufficiently like ‘‘ Plovers’
eggs” to do duty for them in a basketful, but they
are really smaller, more pointed at the narrow end,
with a paler ground colour blotched with reddish-
brown instead of black. Four is the full comple-
ment, and, when these are laid and incubation
has fairly commenced, the birds become very noisy
on being disturbed, and very reluctant to leave the
spot, flying round and round the intruder, like
Lapwings.

The old English name of “ Pool Snipe” bestowed
upon the Redshank is a most appropriate one, for
it is one of the most characteristic ornaments of a
marsh pool in May. In autumn, when the young
A MARSH WALK IN MAY aX

are strong on the wing, and both young and old
assemble in flocks, they betake themselves to the
coast, where, in the harbours at low water, or on
the sands during an ebbing tide, they may be seen
busily feeding on small mollusca, fish, and shrimps,
of which they seem very fond, but which impart a
strong, disagreeable flavour to the bird when
cooked. For this reason Redshanks, if wanted for
the table (and they are excellent eating), should
be always secured before they get down to the salt
water. They are then as good as Snipe. The
same remark applies to the Curlew, which breeds
upon the moors and comes down to the coast in
autumn. According to the old distich,

“* A Curlew, be she white or black,
Carries twelve pence on her back,”

referring to the market value of a bird which was
formerly much esteemed for the table. It is not
unlikely that the ‘Black Curlew” may have been
the Glossy Ibis, which has a Curlew-like bill, and
which, before the drainage of the great fens in
Lincolnshire, Norfolk, Cambridge, and Huntingdon,
was more frequently met with than at the present
day. Lubbock, in his Fauna of Norfolk, written
in 1845, says: ‘Fifty years back the Glossy Ibis
was seen often enough to be known to gunners and
fishermen as the Black Curlew.”

Following the straight course of a long dyke,
wherein a yellow fringe of last year’s reeds uncut
afford shelter to several Reed Warblers (which, how-
ever, have not yet commenced to build), we are
22 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

led to a large shallow pool, so completely covered
with growing reeds, already a foot above the
surface, that at a little distance it might be supposed
to be Zerra firma. The water, however, is a foot
or two deep, in some places more, and it is a
treacherous place to walk through. As we
approach, several Black-headed Gulls, which till

 

THE BLACK-HEADED GULL.

then had been sitting concealed upon their nests,
rise above the reed tops, and come flying towards
us with angry cries, irritated at the invasion of their
breeding quarters. But we are not maliciously
disposed. We shall merely wade out into the reed
bed and look at the nests, taking an egg here and
there which may strike us as being particularly
handsome, to add to a collection which already
contains many a souvenir of a summer day’s ramble.
A MARSH WALK IN MAY 23

Hardly do we set foot within the Gulls’ sanctuary
than a scene of much temporary confusion ensues.
Gulls in numbers rise before us; Coots and Moor-
hens scuttle away in all directions; a fine old
Mallard springs into the air, and a splash of wings
succeeded by a dive shows us where the Duck has
just disappeared, leaving a tiny brood of young but
lately hatched to save themselves by hiding
amongst the sprouting reeds. From the far end of
the pool a great grey Heron slowly gets upon the
wing, and with an awkward flapping flight sails out
over the marsh. Another joins him just beyond,
and the two eventually drop into a distant dyke,
where they are lost to view.

It is a wonderfully beautiful and animated scene,
as we stand knee-deep in water, to contemplate it.
The birds are not to: be persuaded of our peaceful
intentions, but continue to circle over and around
us with noisy cries. The Coots pass and repass us
within gunshot; the Gulls hover overhead; the
Peewits, though keeping over the drier portions of
the marsh, continue to make themselves seen and
heard; and the Reed Warblers chatter incessantly,
while every now and then a Redshank dashes by,
waking the echoes of the wild waste with its fine
loud notes of warning.

We need not long remain here, for we have no
wish unnecessarily to alarm the birds, and, more-
over, the water is cold. Picking up an egg here
and there of Coot, Gull, and Moorhen, we make
for terra firma, and continue on our way across the
marsh.
24 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

We are yet some way from the sea, but it is still
possible to reach the great shingle beach which
looms in the distance, and towards this we turn our
steps, hoping when we get there to add several
fresh species to the list of birds already noted. On
our way we unexpectedly come upon some
Whimbrel feeding out in the marsh. Not unlike a
Curlew, though smaller in size, this bird in Sussex
is called ‘‘ Titterel” from its note, and in Norfolk is
known as “Maybird,” from the regularity of its
appearance in that month, when on its migration
northwards to its breeding grounds. In the
autumn, when the young birds return in small
flocks, they are pretty tame, and may be easily
approached or whistled round within gunshot; but
the old birds going north in spring are more wary,
and can only be approached by careful stalking.
In the present instance we only see and hear enough
to enable us to identify the species, and the birds
are soon out of sight.

Just before reaching the sea beach, we note
some Curlews feeding out in a marsh amongst the
sheep, and they seem pretty tame until we stop to
bring our field-glasses upon them, when they
hurriedly take wing towards the sea, and are soon
lost to view.

Hardly do we set foot upon the shingle when a
pair of Ringed Plovers rise close before us, and by
their noisy cries, as they fly round us in circles,
seem to intimate that they have eggs near at hand.
A somewhat hasty search, however, fails to reveal
them, and we leave the Plovers in undisturbed

 
A MARSH WALK IN MAY 25

possession. Where the shingle borders the marsh
farm, large patches of furze abound, now in full
golden bloom ; and while we are speculating upon
the expected appearance of the Stonechat, a hen
Partridge gets up with much fuss and clamour, and
is shortly joined by the cock bird, who has run
forward a few yards on hearing us approach.
There is evidently a nest at hand in the furze; but
we do not waste time in looking for it, for it is
four o’clock, and we are a long way from home.
The sight of white wings in the distance, amidst
which we note a Black-backed Gull, leads us on
some way further over the beach; but the Gulls
retire as we approach, and we make no better
acquaintance with them.

On our way home across the marsh we catch
sight of a Dabchick, or Little Grebe, in one of the
dykes, and add a few more species, somewhat un-
expectedly, to our list of birds noted. Amongst
others we see three Cuckoos, two of them flying in
company. Were they late arrivals just coming in
from sea? or had they been visiting the reed beds
to see if any Reed Warblers’ nests were yet ready
to receive their eggs?

About one of the marsh farms (the only spots
on the marsh where any trees are to be found) a
solitary pair of Mistle Thrushes fly round with
their well-known noisy screech. Starlings and
Sparrows are busy carrying food to their young,
and on the nearest dyke bank a fine Reed Bunting,
with jet black head and white collar, displays him-
self to great advantage.
26 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Gradually, as the sun nears the horizon, and the
failing light betokens the lateness of the hour, a
solemn stillness reigns over the marsh. The noisy
cries of the Peewits are no longer heard, the Red-
shanks are silent, and the Gulls have settled down
again upon their nests. A dull mist begins to rise,
and in another hour will have hidden from view the
landscape, with all its bird life, which but lately
we so much admired.
THE WHEATEAR ON THE SOUTH
DOWNS

Amoncst the good things of Sussex enumerated
by John Ray in his Zuglish Proverbs (ed. 1742,
p. 262), we find mention made of a “Bourn
Wheatear.” The usually accepted version credits
Sussex with the production of four delicacies,
which, according to Izaak Walton, were stated to
be, in 1653, a Selsea cockle, a Chichester lobster,
an Arundel mullet, and an Amberley trout. Ray,
however, enumerates seven, the other three being
a Pulborough eel, a Rye herring, and a Bourn
Wheatear, which he says ‘‘are the best in their
kind, understand it of those that are taken in this
country.” By a ‘‘Bourn Wheatear” we are to
understand a Wheatear taken on the downs near
Eastbourne by a device, presently to be described,
which was much in vogue with the Southdown
shepherds at the end of the eighteenth and begin-
ning of the nineteenth century.

‘‘Wheatears” says Fuller, writing of Sussex, in
1662, somewhat before the publication of Ray’s
Proverbs, “is a bird peculiar to this county—
hardly found out of it. It is so called because
fattest when wheat is ripe, whereon it feeds; being
no bigger than a Lark, which it equalleth in the

27
28 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

fineness of the flesh, and far exceedeth in the fatness
thereof. The worst is, that being only seasonable
in the heat of summer, and naturally larded with
lumps of fat, it is soon subject to corrupt, so that
(though abounding within forty miles) London
poulterers have no mind to meddle with them,
which no care in carriage can keep from putrefac-
tion. That palate-man’ shall pass in silence who,
being seriously demanded his judgment concerning
the abilities of a great lord, concluded him a man
of very weak parts because he saw him ata great
feast feed on Chickens when there were Wheatears
on the table.”— Worthies of England, vol. ii. p. 382.

This account, having been written more than
two centuries ago, when little or nothing was known
of the habits of our migratory birds, is, as might be
expected, not altogether free from errors. In sup-
posing the Wheatear to be hardly found out of the
county of Sussex, Fuller seems to have considered
it a resident species, whereas, as we now know, it
is a summer migrant, arriving towards the end of
March, and departing in September. His state-
ment that it feeds on wheat must have been a pure
conjecture, arising from a guess at the meaning of
its name, for, so far from being found in the neigh-
bourhood of cornfields, its haunts are on the wide,
open downs, fallow fields, and sandy warrens, where
its diet consists of insects and their larve, and small
thin-shelled mollusca.

The suggestion that the Wheatear is so called
‘“because fattest when wheat is ripe” sounds

1 Cf Willughby, Ornithology, 1678, s.v. “ Partridge.”
WHEATEAR ON SOUTH DOWNS = 29

plausible enough, though it is far from the truth,
the fact being that our Saxon forefathers gave it a
name (as they did to the Redstart, z.e., Red-tail; and
Wagtail, of which Wag-start is the older form) from
a very noticeable peculiarity, namely its white rump,
which is so conspicuous when the bird is in motion.
It is, in fact, a corrupted form of the older word
““wheatears” for ‘“white-ears” (from the Anglo-
Saxon 4vit and ears, the tail, or rump), which was
mistaken for a plural. That this is the true ex-
planation, as long ago pointed out by the present
writer (/ze/d, April 1, 1871), there can be no doubt.

In the third letter of Smollett’s Zravels through
france and Italy (1766) we find the remark :—

“There is... great plenty of the birds so
much admired at Tunbridge under the name of
‘Wheatears.” By the bye, this is a pleasant
corruption of the translation of their French name
Cul-blanc, taken from their colour, for they are
actually white towards the tail.”

Bishop Mant, also, in his Lrztzsk Months,
writes :—

“Fain would I see the Wheatear show
On the dark sward his rump of snow
Of spotless brightness.”

Thus we have excellent authority for this inter-
pretation, which is confirmed by the names “‘ White-
rump ” and ‘“‘ White-tail,” which are still applied to
this bird in different parts of the country.

The abundance of Wheatears at certain seasons
on the downs of Hampshire and Sussex was noticed
by Gilbert White in a letter to the Hon. Daines
30 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Barrington in December 1773, and the number of
these birds which used to be taken years ago upon
the South Downs in autumn was a matter of
notoriety.

‘‘Hereabouts,” says an old chronicle of East-
bourne, ‘‘is the chief place for catching the delicious
birds called Wheatears, which much resemble the
French Ortolans,” and they have played an im-
portant part in the history of this town. Squire

 

THE WHEATEAR.

William Wilson, of Hitchin, Lord of the Manor of
Eastbourne, was in Oliver Cromwell’s time vehe-
mently suspected of loyalty to the Stuarts, and one
Lieut. Hopkins with a troop of dragoons swooped
down into Eastbourne to search the squire’s house,
and, if needful, to arrest him as a malignant. The
squire was laid up with the gout, but Mistress
Wilson, his true wife, with the rarely failing shrewd-
ness of her sex, at once placed before Lieut.
Hopkins and his troopers a prodigious pie filled
with Wheatears, which rare repast, the chronicle
WHEATEAR ON SOUTH DOWNS | 31

goes on to say, the soldiers did taste with so much
amazement, delight, and jollity, that the squire
upstairs had ample time to burn all the papers that
would compromise him ; and when Lieut. Hopkins,
full of Wheatear pie, came to search the house,
there was not so much treasonable matter found as
could have brought a mouse within the perils of a
premunire, At the Restoration, the lord of the
manor became Sir William Wilson, of Eastbourne,
a dignity well earned by his devotion to the royal
cause; but the chronicle goes on to hint that
Charles II. was passionately fond of Wheatears,
and that possibly the liberality of the squire in
supplying his Majesty’s table with these delicacies
may have had something to do with the creation of
the baronetcy.

Gilbert White, in one of his letters to Pennant,
wrote: ‘‘Some Wheatears continue with us the
winter through ;” but Sir William Jardine, in a foot-
note to his edition of White’s Se/dorne, conjectured
that on this point he was mistaken. He perhaps
thought that some had remained throughout the
winter, from having seen them in March on their
earliest arrival in spring. Writing to Daines
Barrington in December 1773 (Letter xvii.), and
describing a journey over the downs from Selborne
in Hants to Ringmer in Sussex, he remarked :—

‘Notwithstanding all my care, I saw nothing
like a summer bird of passage ; and, what is more
strange, not one Wheatear, though they abound so
in the autumn as to be a considerable perquisite to
the shepherds that take them; and though many
32 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

are to be seen to my knowledge all the winter
through in many parts of the south of England.
The most intelligent shepherds tell me that some
few of these birds appear on the downs in March,
and then withdraw to breed, probably in warrens
and stone quarries. Now and then a nest is
ploughed up in a fallow on the downs under a
furrow, but it is thought a rarity. At the time of
wheat harvest they begin to be taken in great
numbers, are sent for sale in vast quantities to
Brighthelmstone and Tunbridge, and appear at the
tables of all the gentry that entertain with any
degree of elegance. About Michaelmas they retire,
and are seen no more till March. Though these
birds are when in season in great plenty on the
South Downs round Lewes, yet at Eastbourne,
which is the eastern extremity of those downs, they
abound much more. One thing is very remarkable
—that though in the height of the season so many
hundreds of dozens are taken, yet they never are
seen to flock, and it is a rare thing to see more
than three or four at a time, so that there must be
a perpetual flitting and constant progressive suc-
cession.”

He concludes with an observation, which at
the present day seems to require some correction,
namely :—

“It does notappear that any Wheatears are taken
to the westward of Houghton Bridge, which stands
on the river Arun.”

This is a mistake. We have frequently seen
Wheatears in spring on the downs above Chichester,
WHEATEAR ON SOUTH DOWNS _ 33

and in autumn on the low-lying ground between
Bognor and Selsea Bill. Many pairs breed annually
on the South downs, near Uppark, in the parish of
Harting, which is within a few miles of the borders
of Hants, and not very far from Selborne.

The method of catching Wheatears adopted by
the Southdown shepherds while tending their flocks
was as simple as it was effectual. It appears also
to be of some antiquity. Willughby, in 1676,

 

TRAP FOR WHEATEAR.

described it in his Ovuzthologia, which two years
later was translated by his friend Ray. The pas-
sage in the English version (p. 233) runs thus :—

“The Sussex shepherds to catch these birds, use
this art. They dig long turves of earth and lay
them across the holes whereout they were digged,
and about the middle of them hang snares made ot
horse hair. The birds being naturally very timorous
ifa Hawk happens to appear, or but a cloud pass
over and intercept the sunbeams, hastily run to hide
themselves in the holes under the turves, and so are

Cc
34 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

caught by the neck in the snares. Upon the downs
of Sussex, which are a ridge of mountains running
all along by the sea coast for thirty or forty miles
in length, they are taken yearly in great numbers
in harvest time or the beginning of autumn, where
for their fatness and delicate relish they are highly
prized.”

Macky, in his Journey through England,
1732 (1. 125), has thus referred to the Sussex
Wheatears :—

“T lay at a pretty village called Eastborn and
supp'd upon some little birds call’d Wheatears,
resembling our Ortolans. This is the chief place
where these birds are taken. I had the pleasure
of going out the next morning a-catching of them
with a shepherd, and took two dozen for a break-
fast. The manner of catching them is very
particular ; they cut a turf of about a foot long and
half a foot deep, and turn the turf to cover the hole,
in which they put a snare of horse hair, and the birds,
being very shy, on the approach of any one, running
into these holes for shelter, are taken.”

Gilbert White’s correspondent, William Mark-
wick, who lived at Catsfield, near Battle, about five
miles from the sea, contributed a useful ‘‘ Catalogue
of Birds found in the County of Sussex” to the
Transactions of the Linnean Soctety in May 1795.
In this Catalogue he notices the Wheatears as being
“found in great plenty on our South Downs,” and
after referring to the traps used by the shepherds for
capturing them, described as horse-hair nooses
placed under a sod of turf dug out of the ground
WHEATEAR ON SOUTH DOWNS 35

for that purpose, adds the following remarks: ‘They
are first set up every year on St James’s Day, the
25th of July, soon after which time they are caught
in numbers truly astonishing. .. . Observing that
all the birds which were caught in the proper
season had the same coloured plumage as the hen
bird, I made some inquiries respecting them of a
shepherd at East Bourn, who informed me that the
flight consisted chiefly of young birds, which arrived
in the greatest numbers when westerly wind pre-
vailed, and that they always came against the wind.
He told me that on the 15th and 16th of August
1792, he caught twenty-seven dozen with only a few
old birdsamongst them ; but this is a small number
when compared with the almost incredible quantity
sometimes taken. A gentleman informed me that
his father’s shepherd once caught eighty-four dozen
in aday.” Even a greater number than this must
have fallen to the share of a shepherd remembered
by a friend of the late Mr M. A. Lower. This
man, after having filled a large bag and his wife’s
apron with the game, was fain to take off his round
smock and to fasten the neck and sleeves of that
rustic garment by way of sack, which he filled
to repletion with his delicious victims (Lower,
Contributions to Literature, p. 153). It was for-
merly a common practice for wayfarers on coming
to a Wheatear trap to take out the bird and to leave
a penny as a guzd pro guo.

The late Rev. Leonard Blomefield (formerly
Jenyns), who died in September 1893, at the
advanced age of ninety-three, and whose Manual
36 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

of British Vertebrate Animals, published in 1835,
is even now a useful book of reference, has left
behind him a pleasing reminiscence of the ‘‘ Bourn
Wheatears.” In a little memoir of his friend
William Yarrell, who died in 1856, printed for
private distribution only, he wrote in 1885 :—

““One summer, I think it must have been about
1831, Yarrell and myself, being full of the subject
of British fishes, agreed upon a trip to the south
coast to see what novelties we could get there, or
specimens in further illustration of the materials we
had already got together for our respective works.
. . . One afternoon during our stay at Eastbourne
we strolled on to the downs, and had a long chat
with one of the shepherd boys who—while the
season lasts—make a rich harvest by catching
Wheatears for the table. It was then just the time
(September), and the birds were beginning to
collect in large numbers on the downs previous to
migration. We were greatly amused at the boy’s
eagerness for the sport. His whole soul was wrapt
up in it—even to the imagining, in his simplicity,
that one purpose for which Parliament met was to
determine the exact day when Wheatear catching |
should begin. I remember giving him twopence
for one of his snares, which I have by me still. Of
course, we had Wheatears for dinner that day, and
being the choice dish of the place, which Eastbourne
cooks know very well how to prepare, they were
deliciously served up.”

Of this snare, bought from a Sussex shepherd, Mr
Blomefield afterwards sent me a sketch of the
 

‘UVELVAHM YOL AUVNS

 

 

 

 

 

 

—— ‘SES wroge — thy aoe
oe tag Ty Foggys a

CT ye anf wey

Ms THA“
fy wary
38 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

natural size, with an inscription in his own hand-
writing, of which a facsimile is here given.

It will be seen that by inserting this con-
trivance in the opening which has been cut in the
ground immediately under the turf which is laid
across the hole thus made, a double horse-hair snare
is set in such a manner that a Wheatear passing
under the sod cannot escape being caught.

One of the last of the old race of Southdown
shepherds was John Dudeney, of Plumpton—a man
so remarkable in his way that he was thought
deserving of mention in Lower’s Sussex Wor-
thies. Although following so humble an avoca-
tion, he by no means neglected education, but found
time and opportunity to learn geography, mathe-
matics, and even French. His acquirements at
Jength placed him so much above his station that
he was prevailed upon to give up the care of
sheep, and, obtaining a situation in the printing
office of Mr Baxter, of Lewes, he lived to impart
information to hundreds of Sussex folk who, with-
out his assistance, would have received no educa-
tion of any kind. He was one of the founders of
the Mechanics’ Institute at Lewes, where he used
to give lectures, and continued his tuition until
within a few weeks of his death, which occurred in
May 1852, in the seventieth year of his age. His
biographer tells us that :—

‘All his youthful savings were expended in the
purchase of books. His wages were six pounds a
year, and perquisites were derived from his master
allowing him to keep a sheep (whose lamb and
WHEATEAR ON SOUTH DOWNS _ 39

wool brought him about fifteen shillings a year) and
from the capture of Wheatears—the English Ortolan
—then much more abundant on the downs than
now.”

In a communication which he made at an
advanced period of his life to Mr R. W. Blencowe,
he said :—

“At midsummer 1802 I went to be head
shepherd to Mr James Ingram of Rottingdean.
The farm was called the Westside Farm, extend-
ing from Rottingdean to Blackrock in Brighton
parish ; it was a long narrow strip of ground, not
averaging more than half a mile in width, and
extending along the sea coast. I caught great
numbers of Wheatears during the season for taking
them, which lasts from the middle of July to the
end of August. The most I ever caught in one
day was thirteen dozen ; but we thought it a good
day if we caught three or four dozen. We sold
them to a poulterer at Brighton, who took all we
could catch in the season at eighteenpence a dozen.
From what I have heard from old shepherds it
cannot be doubted that they were caught in much
greater numbers a century ago than of late. I have
heard them speak of an immense number being
taken in one day by a shepherd at East Dean, near
Beachy Head. I think they said he took nearly
one hundred dozen; so many that he could not
thread them on crow quills in the usual manner,
but took off his round frock and made a sack of it
to put them into, and his wife did the same with
her petticoat. This must have happened when
40 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

there was a great flight. Their numbers now are
so decreased that some shepherds do not set up
any coops, as it does not pay for the trouble.”*

Lower, in his Contributions to Literature, 1854,
remarks (p. 153): ‘‘ The Wheatear is becoming much
less numerous than heretofore, to the great loss of
the shepherds. The T-shaped incisions or traps in the
turf are still seen, however, at the proper season, and
many a timid, inoffensive bird still subjects itself to
capital punishment in the horse-hair noose insidiously
concealed therein.

1 Fleet, Giimpses of our Ancestors in Sussex, p. 94.

 
PAGHAM HARBOUR PAST AND
PRESENT

In the south-western corner of the long county of
Sussex, and on the eastern side of the great pro-
montory or headland known as Selsea Bill, there ex-
isted until 1887 one of the most attractive harbours
for wildfowl to be found in the south of England.
Formed originally by an incursion of the sea at the
weakest portion of the long shingle beach which for
ages kept back the water from the low-lying inland
marshes, it furnished, in its wide waste of 3000
acres, the most important requisites of food, shelter,
and comparative quiet, which are so essential to the
presence of wildfowl. Localities which do not
offer these attractions never hold birds long. They
come, it is true, with wonderful regularity at the
usual periods of their migration ; but, after a few
days’ rest, they again journey onwards in search of
those conditions which are so essential to their
comfort. With no railway stations nearer than
Bognor or Chichester—both of them some five
miles distant—Pagham Harbour lay sufficiently off
the beaten track to be out of the way of ordinary
tourists, and, strange to say, was known to few
beyond the professional gunners and fishermen
dwelling about Bognor, Pagham, Siddlesham, and
Selsea. Nor were these by any means a numerous
4l
42 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

class, for the surrounding district was too sparsely
populated to furnish many punts or guns even in the
height of the wildfowl season, the result being that
the birds were never unduly disturbed, or if for the
time being they were much shot at, the survivors,

 

THE CURLEW.

with fresh accessions to their ranks, were sure to
come back with the turn of the tide. One great
advantage which this fine harbour possessed was
that it was too shallow to be navigable except by
small craft, fishing boats, and punts, which were
never numerous. At ebb tide an enormous extent
of mud flats was laid bare, intersected by creeks and
PAGHAM HARBOUR 43

channels of no great depth, and for the most part
only just wide enough to work a gunning punt in.
On these “muds,” as they were locally termed, in
spring and autumn, when the tide was out, flocks
of Gulls and Sandpipers might be seen scattered
about in all directions, gleaning hastily the harvest
of the sea. Ringed Plovers (locally called «‘ Wide-
awakes”) and Dunling (or ‘“Oxbird”) were as
common as Sparrows in a farmyard. The musical
notes of the Redshank and the weird cry of the
Curlew might be heard all day long at intervals,
sounding wild and melancholy over the dreary
waste of mud and water, and agreeably relieving the
otherwise monotonous silence which prevailed.
Although most numerous in spring and autumn,
when they received great accessions to their ranks
from the migrating flocks which continually joined
them, these birds might be seen there all the year
round, as might also, in smaller numbers, the Knot
(Tringa canutus), locally known as the ‘ Little
Plover,” the Bar-tailed Godwit or ‘‘Strant,” the
Turnstone or ‘“ Shell-turner,” and the Oyster-
catcher or “Olive.” Other species appeared for a
few week only in spring and autumn. In May the
Whimbrel (Mumenzus pheopus), known in Sussex
as the “ Titterel” from its cry, and in Norfolk as
the Maybird, from the regularity of its appearance
in that month, was for a brief period quite numerous.
About the same time of year came the Knot,
the Curlew Sandpiper (Z7inga subarquata), and the
Bar-tailed Godwits, with their speckled backs and
bright bay breasts, which characterise the plumage
44 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

of the breeding season. The longer legged Black-
tailed Godwit or “ Broad-tailed Strant”” was a much
scarcer bird, and never came in such large parties
as he of the barred tail. This seemed strange, for
the black-tailed bird is the one which used to breed in
the English fens, and still nests in the marshes
of Holland—from which circumstance it might be

 

 

THE DUNLING.

expected to visit us more frequently and in larger
numbers than is found to be the case, the Bar-
tailed Godwit having to reach and return from its
breeding haunts, which lie beyond lat. 60° N. in
Finland, Northern Russia, and Siberia. All these
birds were more numerous in the autumn, when
the bulk of the flocks consisted of young birds, dis-
tinguishable by their shorter and weaker bills, and
by their buff-coloured breasts.
PAGHAM HARBOUR 45

With the Godwits and Knots in May came also
a few Grey Plovers, never in large flocks, but in
small parties of ten or a dozen. At this time of
year they were exceedingly handsome ; their breasts
jet black, their backs looking as if flakes of snow
had fallen upon them as they slept at night, their
dark heads being similarly whitened here and there

 

THE SANDERLING.

in patches. On the wing they were at once dis-
tinguishable, not only by their chequered appear-
ance (the black breast and axillary plumes contrast-
ing finely with the snow-white under surface of the
wing), but also by their loud and plaintive dissyllabic
call, uttered at intervals as they flew.

In the main channel, as it was called, which
wound tortuously from the harbour’s mouth to its
north-east corner, where lay the little village of
Siddlesham, large black posts were set at intervals
46 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

to mark the deep water, and prevent such vessels as
essayed to reach Siddlesham from getting stranded
on the mud. These great square-headed posts
formed most convenient resting-places for Cormor-
ants, Terns, and perhaps, on rare occasions, an
Osprey.

It was a pretty sight to watch a Cormorant
fishing as the tide went out, when, after getting his
fill, he would mount on one of these posts, and there
sit for half an hour or more with expanded wings,
hung out to dry in the breeze. Sometimes three or
four Terns, or Sea-swallows, would contend for
possession of the same post, and, after jostling each
other for some time with noisy cries, would fly off to
the next post, where perhaps the same manceuvres
would be repeated.

During the months of August and September,
when the young Gulls and Terns were well on the
wing, there would sometimes be hundreds of these
birds in the harbour. The professional gunners
used to shoot them when they got a chance, in
order to dispose of them in Chichester either to the
poulterer or birdstuffer, and they found their way
eventually either to the p/umasstev, or to some public
or private collection cf British birds. All the
commoner species of Gulls were usually represented,
except perhaps the so-called Common Gull (Larus
canus), which was by no means numerous. But
Kittiwakes (especially young birds in autumn),
Black-headed Gulls, Greater and Lesser Black-
backs, and Herring Gulls, in all stages of plumage,
were plentiful enough. Occasionally an immature
‘AUOMSV SINAd

 
48 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Little Gull would be brought in by a gunner, and
in hard weather a great Glaucous Gull would come
into the harbour, accompanied perhaps by a few
Skuas and Petrels. But these never stayed long,
and, if not shot at and killed, drifted away like rest-
less spirits over the beach and away seaward. Now
and again some solitary belated Guillemot or Razor-
bill would put in an appearance, and might be
observed diving in one of the channels as the tide
ran out, but these ‘‘cliff-birds” did not often come
far up the harbour; they were more often to be seen
on the seaward side of the shingle beach, and
generally some little way out from shore. I seldom
paid much regard to these birds, except just to note
their species and watch them fishing when a good
opportunity occurred. It was to the Plovers, Cur-
lews, Redshanks, Godwits, Knots, e¢ zd genus omune,
that I paid most attention in autumn, and to Ducks
and Black Geese in the winter months I devoted
many a long and often successful day.

The extensive marshes lying to the westward of
Pagham Harbour, between Siddlesham and Selsea,
are intersected, as such marshes usually are, by
broad dykes to help the drainage, and keep in the
cattle which grazed there. Times have changed,
but thirty years ago these marshes were seldom
visited by any but those who looked after the stock.
The birds which resorted there were consequently
very little disturbed, and it was possible to make a
very nice little ‘‘mixed bag” if one happened to hit
off the proper season.

Duck and Mallard, and Teal were often in the

 
PAGHAM HARBOUR 49

dykes, with an occasional Goldeneye—generally
single birds, females, or young males— Little Grebes,
and now and then in winter the Sclavonian and
Eared Grebes, almost always solitary. Snipes of
course were scattered about, and had to be looked
for; Green Sandpipers and Grey Phalaropes I
repeatedly saw and shot. At high tide Golden

 

THE TURNSTONE,

Plovers and Peewits rested in the marshes; at low
water they betook themselves to the harbour to feed
upon the recently exposed ooze, and it was remark-
able how well they appeared to know when the tide
had turned. As soon as the highest mud-banks
began to show above the receding water, they rose
in a body from the marsh, and were off to feed upon
the ooze. The Peewits were generally too artful,

and flew in too straggling a flock, to afford much
D
50 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

chance to the gun, but the Golden Plovers came
sweeping along in a more compact body, and, by
lying in wait for them behind the harbour wall, in a
direct line between their position in the marshes
and the highest mud-flats, I often managed to get
two barrels in very effectively as they crossed,
dropping perhaps seven or eight of them, and, on
one well-remembered occasion, ‘‘a baker’s dozen.”
They were generally in capital condition, and made
a welcome addition to the very limited “ bill of fare”
which such an out-of-the-way place afforded.

The little village of Siddlesham was, and still is, a
very primitive place indeed. A fewsmall straggling
houses, fewer shops—including those of a butcher,
baker, and general grocer—a mill, and an inn
rejoicing in the sign of the “Crab and Lobster” ;
not an inappropriate sign either ; for “ lobster pots”
were in general use there, and supplied us with
many an excellent supper. A ‘Chichester lobster”
is proverbial as one of the four good things of
Sussex, another being a “ Selsea cockle.” Pagham
Harbour, lying as it were between Chichester
and Selsea, could boast both of lobsters and cockles
not inferior in flavour to those of greater celebrity
for size.

At low water the fishermen might be seen walk-
ing across the soft mud of the harbour to look at
their lobster pots, and carrying baskets for cockles,
which they gathered as they went. I sometimes
accompanied them on their way, and was always
much struck at the skill with which they discovered
and unearthed a cockle from below the surface
“A0IN IS DHL

 
52 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

of the sandy soil in which they lurked. To an
unpractised eye it seemed nothing short of mar-
vellous, when walking across a tract of ooze which
looked “‘as bare as a billiard table,” to see my com-
panion suddenly stop, stoop down, plunge his fore-
finger into the sand, and scoop out a cockle, which
till then had been to me invisible. His quick eye
had detected the tiny worm-like hole which
indicated the presence of the mollusk, and long
practice enabled him to distinguish the contracted
tunnel through which the cockle had passed from
any other hole, or the boring of a Sandpiper.

But to return to the inn, with its lattice windows
and sanded floors; the lodging was rough, but it
was clean; and after a tramp of ten miles in the
marshes after Snipe and Duck, or a hard day’s work
in the punt after Plover or Black Geese, it would be
strange if a man could not sleep well, even though
his room might lack a carpet.

Those who have read the works of the late Mr
A. E. Knox—and who that is fond of sport and
natural history has not ?—will recollect the many
passages in which allusion is made to Pagham
Harbour, either as the scene of a good day’s wild-
fowl shooting, or of some interesting ornithological
observation. Residing, as he did, for some time in
a cottage between Bognor and Pagham, this once
famous harbour was his ‘‘ happy hunting ground.”

It was upon the long shingle beach that ran
across the harbour’s mouth that he used to lie and
watch the wildfowl coming in from the sea to rest
and feed after their long journeys from the north.
PAGHAM HARBOUR 53

It was here that on a memorable occasion he turned
to such good account the manceuvres of a punt
gunner, whose sudden appearance in proximity to a
large flock of wildfowl in the harbour at first filled
him with consternation, but who eventually enabled
him to make a most satisfactory right and left at a
Brent Goose and a Wild Swan as they came flying

 

THE GREY PHALAROPE.

towards him after the discharge of the big punt gun
had put them up (Game Birds and Wildfow/, pp. 61-
71,and Ornithological Rambles, pp. 8,9). It wason
this part of the Sussex coast also that he made
those interesting observations on the migratory habits
of the Pied Wagtail (Oruzthological Rambles, p. 81)
and other small birds, which threw a new light on the
subject of bird migration, and which have been
since approvingly quoted in Yarrell’s standard work
54 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

on British birds (4th ed. vol. i., pp. 544, 545).
“The movements of the Pied Wagtail,” says
Professor Newton (of. czt.), “‘ have been noticed by
many writers, but by none more carefully than Mr
Knox, who, having lived for some years on the
coast of Sussex, was singularly well placed for the
observation of migratory birds in general, and paid
much attention to them. A great deal of what he
has so happily recorded with respect to the Pied
Wagtail applies equally to many others, so that his
remarks deserve more than ordinary consideration,
serving as they do to throw light on the whole of
that mysterious subject, and being those of an
unusually watchful and accurate ornithologist.”

As might be expected from the nature of the
place, the birds which resorted there were chiefly
waders and wildfowl, and at all seasons some of the
commoner species of Gulls. In spring and autumn
the waders were decidedly in the majority, in winter
the Ducks, Geese, and occasionally Swans were the
most conspicuous objects upon this wild waste of
mud and water. Forty years (Zheu fugaces/)
have elapsed since the writer first visited Pagham
Harbour, and discovered what an exceilent spot it
was for studying the habits, notes, flight, food,
changes of plumage, and other peculiarities of the
birds which resorted there; and between the years
1863 and 1887 there was no better ‘‘shore-shooting ”
to be had anywhere in the south of England than
might there be enjoyed at the proper season. It
was in 1862 that I made the acquaintance of the
late Mr A. E. Knox, and listening to his animated
PAGHAM HARBOUR 55

description of Pagham and its surroundings, became
fired with his enthusiasm while profiting by his
experience. Even at this distance of time I recall,
as if it were only yesterday, the many enjoyable
weeks spent at intervals in that lonely harbour, in
the midst of the most varied bird life which could
gladden the eyes of an ornithologist. Many a wily

 

THE WIGEON.

Curlew was then stalked and brought to bag; many
a Plover and Redshank were decoyed within
gunshot by an imitation of their notes; many a
Duck and Snipe were flushed and killed out of the
marsh drains. There seemed at that time no more
enjoyable kind of shooting than that which was
afforded by a tramp round the harbour, or a cruise
just before high tide in a gunning punt.
56 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

To give an idea of the variety of birds that
might be procured with an ordinary 12-bore
shoulder gun, here is a list of birds killed one day
at the end of August 1867: 1 Sheldrake, 2 Teal, 2
Curlew, 1 Grey Plover, 21 Ringed Plover, 11 Knots, 4
Turnstones, 3 Greenshanks, 6 Redshanks, 1 Ruff, 2
Common Sandpipers,2Curlew Sandpipers, 24 Dunlins,
1 Little Stint, 1 Black Tern, 1 Black-headed Gull, 3
Herring Gulls, and 1 Lesser Black-backed Gull. On
another day in September of the same year, the bag
was: 6 Grey Plovers, 1 Curlew, 1 Whimbrel, 1 Bar-
tailed Godwit, 4 Oystercatchers, 2 Redshanks, 3 Lap-
wings, 13 Knots, to Ringed Plovers, 1 Turnstone, 1
Common Sandpiper, 1 Curlew Sandpiper, 34 Dunlins,
4 Little Stints, 4 Grey Phalaropes, 1 Arctic Tern, 1
Black-headed Gull, and 1 Herring Gull. None of
these birds were really wasted. Some of the best
of each species were generally skinned and pre-
served, either for the shooter’s own collection, or
that of some friend ; a great many were eaten (and
there are few better items in a sportsman’s menu than
a dish of roast Plovers or a properly made Knot pie).
While such uneatable birds as Gulls, Terns, Scaup
Ducks, Scoters, or what not, if not required for the
collection, were given away to the fishermen, who
either cut them up as bait for the lobster pots, or
sold them to the nearest dealer in Chichester for
what they would fetch.

Many arare bird has made Pagham Harbour
its temporary resting-place—sometimes to pass on
unharmed, and possibly to return another season
but oftener to fall a victim to some keen shooter
‘“UHLTIHS SUPTMOT FHL

 

 

 
58 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

whose practised eye detects the presence of an
unusual visitor amongst the flocks of common
species which he is daily accustomed to see.
Whether the rarities thus procured are always
brought to the notice of naturalists is more than
doubtful. Some of them occasionally get recorded
by the shooters, or, coming to the hands of local
collectors, eventually become immortalised in a
county list. This was the case with the birds in
Mr Knox’s collection (now at Goodwood), many of
which: were procured at Pagham Harbour and in
the neighbourhood, and may be found noticed in
the “Systematic Catalogue of the Birds of
Sussex,” appended to that author’s Oruzthological
Rambles.

Amongst the rarer birds of prey met with at
Pagham Harbour, and occasionally shot there, may
be mentioned the Osprey, Kite, and Montagu’s
Harrier. The last named (of which the writer has
seen several) frequented the marshes on either side
of the harbour, and were always observed in
autumn, when the individuals met with were almost
invariably birds of the year. Amongst the smaller
passerine birds, the Waxwing and Red-winged
Starling have been procured in this district; the
Bearded Tit not far off, at Fishbourne, while the
Rock Pipit was found breeding near Aldwick and
Pagham, and the Cirl Bunting near Bognor.
Amongst the uncommon birds which have been
observed and procured at Pagham Harbour may
be noticed the Dotterel (Zudromias morincllus),
locally known as the ‘‘ Land Dotterel” to distinguish
PAGHAM HARBOUR 59

it from the ‘‘ Ringed Dotterel,” one of the commonest
of shore birds. The former was very rarely met
with, and then only in small ‘“‘trips” in the marshes
during the autumnal migration. The writer never
fell in with it there but once. This was in the
month of September, when five or six of them
coming up unexpectedly from behind, dashed by so

 

THE BRENT GOOSE,

rapidly that a random shot only stopped a single
bird, which proved on examination to be a bird of
the year.

Amongst the rarer shore birds procured at
different times in the harbour, or in the neigh-
bouring marshes may be mentioned the Avocet,
Black-winged Stilt, Kentish Plover, Dusky Red-
shank, Grey Phalarope, Spoonbill, and Crane,

Besides the ordinary wildfowl, such as Duck
60 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

and Mallard, Teal, Wigeon, Tufted Duck, and
Goldeneye, there came to this favoured spot in
winter Pintail, Scaup Duck, Smew, Merganser, and
Goosander, regularly, immature Long-tailed Duck
very rarely, and now and then a common Scoter
strayed in from the sea. All the Grebes were
represented at different times, though nearly always
in winter plumage. Grey Geese were never at any
time common in Pagham Harbour, even in very
severe winters, the commonest Wild Goose there
being undoubtedly the Brent. Mr Knox, however,
once shot a couple of Grey-lag Geese in the
harbour, and both the Bean Goose and the
Bernicle have also been occasionally killed there.
Brent Geese, on the other hand, were sometimes
so numerous in the harbour at night, that fourteen
were once killed at a double shot with a shoulder
gun, by wading down a channel at low water
and shooting into their dark, almost indistinguish-
able ranks as they paddled about in the dusk “in
close order.” In January and February the writer
seldom had much difficulty in bagging a few of
these birds, either by working a punt up to them,
or, if they were wild, by lying concealed behind
the sea-wall, and getting a fisherman to go round
them in a punt and move them slowly towards the
ambush. They never would come very near the
shore, although by a little generalship they could
sometimes be made to fly across a corner of the
harbour within gun shot of the bank in their
attempt to wheel before retreating to a safe
distance in the middle of the harbour, on which
PAGHAM HARBOUR 61

lucky occasions they usually left two of their
number dead in their wake to be picked up by the
man in the punt.

But these good old times are gone for ever.
There is no shooting of any kind to be had there

 

THE FOWLER’S DOG.

now; for the harbour no longer exists, and the
migrating flocks which wing their way in that
direction now pass on to the westward in search of
some other haven. A few years ago a company
was formed for the purpose of draining and re-
claiming this famous resort of wildfowl. After
62 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

many vain attempts to keep out the sea by working
day and night, Sundays and weekdays, with re-
lays of men, the mouth of the harbour was at
length closed, and, the tide being forcibly kept out,
the harbour, partly by pumping and draining,
partly by evaporation, became gradually dry. A
great portion of it is now under cultivation, and
when the writer last visited this once ‘happy
hunting ground,” he found many acres of roots
where he had often worked his punt, and put up a
hare on the former feeding grounds of the Wigeon
and Brent Goose.

For the purposes of sport, therefore—and it may
be said for the purposes also of ornithological
observation—this fine harbour is now utterly and
irretrievably spoilt, affording another illustration of
the way in which the fauna and flora of a district
may, by man’s interference and in the course of a
lifetime become wholly changed in its character,
and species become exterminated or driven away
by altering the conditions of life under which alone
their existence was possible.
DEER-LEAPS

In a few scattered parks in England may still be
seen remains of what are termed ‘‘deer-leaps ’—an
ancient contrivance for taking deer, the origin of
which dates back probably to the time of Canute
the Dane, who, in the first year of his reign (a.D.
1018) did (as Manwood tells us in his 77eatise of
Forest Laws) “appoint such forests and chases as
then were, their limits and bounds certain, and to
the intent to have his own forests and other
privileged places the better preserved from
offenders in them.” At a council held at Win-
chester in that year, he passed his now celebrated
code of forest laws, which, afterwards confirmed
by divers kings, regulated the ownership, preserva-
tion, and management of vert and venison through-
out the land.*. These laws were administered by a
‘‘swainmote,” or court composed of officers called
verderers, foresters, and agisters, who, amongst
other business, adjudicated upon all cases in which
deer were killed without warrant.

One of the articles of inquiry in the court of
swainmote was: ‘Whether any man have any

1 The authenticity of this Code has been much questioned,

but the arguments fro and con are too lengthy to be here

discussed.
63
64 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

great close within three miles of the forest that
have: any saltories [sadtatorium], or great gaps,
called deer-lopes, to receive deer into them when
they be in chasing, and when they are in them they
cannot get out again.” This is, perhaps, the
earliest explanation which can now be found of the
meaning of the term ‘“deer-leap,” although, as
will presently be shown, this definition admits of
modification, for the contrivance in question was
not, as here implied, a mere pitfall into which deer
were driven, or might accidentally fall, and be
confined until killed by the owner, who exercised
the right of thus capturing them. Whether the
Saxon ‘‘der-fald” (deerfold) may be regarded as
synonymous with ‘“‘deer-leap,” is not certain. Prof.
Earle, in his edition of the Saxon Chronicles,
considers it identical with the faza. He says:
* The hunt began by sending men round to brush
and beat the wood, and drive the game with horns
and dogs into the ambuscade. This pen is the Zaza
so frequently occurring among the sz/v@ in Domes-
day. The ‘der-fa/d’ of our text seems to be the
same.” *

It is remarkable that this very word ‘“ Deerfold,”
or, as it is pronounced, ‘‘ Darfill,” still survives as the
name of a rough, hilly tract of country in the

1The meaning of the word Aaza (Fr. haze) is discussed and
explained in my L£ssays on Sport and Natural History, pp.
41, 42. It occurs as the name of a town in Brecon, and also in
tne plural as the towns of Hayes in Middlesex and in Kent, and
a piece of land in the parish of Shobdon, close to the site of a
priory founded by Sir Oliver de Merlimond in the twelfth
century.
DEER-LEAPS 65

parishes of Amestrey, Lingen, and Wigmore, in
Herefordshire, which was common land until some
time early in the last century.

Fosbroke in his “ Abstract of the MS. Lives of
the Barons of Berkeley, by John Smith, Esq., M.P.
for Midhurst,” tem. Jac. I. (p. 77), explains ‘“ deer-
leaps” to be “private parks adjoining forests,
allowed by royal license to have places where the
deer might enter by leaping and be retained.”

More accurately speaking, of course it was not
the park “allowed to have such a place,” but the
place itself, which in its formation varied in different
localities according to the nature of the ground and
the general surroundings. Sometimes it was
merely a low place in the park paling over which
the deer could easily jump, but having on the park
side a ditch with a long slope towards the park,
rendering return difficult. The ‘‘deer-leap” at
Wolseley Park, bordering on Cannock Chase in
Staffordshire, is of this description. An engraving
of it is given in Shirley’s Euglsh Deer Parks,
1867 (p. 191).

In other cases where no paling existed a deep
fosse was dug along the boundary line, and a per-
pendicular wall (some seven or eight feet perhaps
in height) was built from the bottom of the fosse to
the level of the ground on the forest side; while on
the park side the ground was gradually sloped
away from the bottom of the wall towards the park,
the result being that a deer could leap down from
the forest into the park, but could not so easily get
back again. Of this description was the “ deer-

E
66 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

leap” at Hursley Park, Hampshire, which is also
figured by Mr Evelyn Shirley in the work last
quoted (p. 85), and I have seen the remains of a
similar one at Exton Park, Rutlandshire, the seat
of the Earl of Gainsborough."

The privilege, which was sparingly accorded, of
making and maintaining a ‘‘deer-leap” on the
borders of a forest or royal chase was always
specially granted by deed or charter, and could not
otherwise be claimed as of right by the owner of
the park, who had license to inclose it.

The records of special grants of this nature are
not very numerous, and a few may here be cited as
curiosities.

In the county of Somerset, Robert de Were, a
son of Robert Fitzharding (¢emp. Hen. II.), had
‘‘deer-leaps” on his manors of Barrow and English-
combe.

A patent roll of the eighth year of King John (a.p.

1The position of this ‘“deer-leap” is somewhat singular,
inasmuch as it is not situated, as usual, on the present boundary
of the park, but directly across a broad ride in Tunnelly Wood.
An old keeper (Robert Williams, aged seventy-four), with whom I
had some conversation on the subject, told me that he re-
unembered the old people in his youth talking about this ‘“ deer-
leap,” and that there was a tradition to the effect that it was used
for shooting deer; that the shooter crouched in the fosse under
the stone wall, and that the deer were driven by beaters directly
up the ride, and so forced to take the leap. I cannot help think-
ing that this was altogether a misapprehension of its object ; and
judging from the growth of the timber, I should suppose that
there has been an alteration of boundary, in consequence of the
wood on this side now projecting further into the park than was
formerly the case. I remarked also that the slope of the fosse
from the base of the stone wall is towards the park, and not
towards the forest.
DEER-LEAPS 67

1206), grants a license to John Comyn, Archbishop
of Dublin, to have a park at Kilcopsantan, and a
‘‘deer-leap” therein. In 1247 an agreement made
between Robert de Quincy, Earl of Winchester,

 

A TYPICAL FALLOW BUCK.

and Roger de Somery, Baron Dudley, defined their
respective rights of hunting in Charnwood Forest,
and the adjoining park of Bradgate, in Leicester-
shire. It is cited by Blount in his Axczent Tenures,
and is regarded as one of the earliest and most
68 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

curious instances which can be adduced of a hunting
agreement. I need only quote so much of the
translation as relates to the “deer-leaps” between.
the forest and the park :—

‘‘This is the agreement made at Leicester on the
day of St Vincent the Martyr (January 22), in the
thirty-first year of the reign of King Henry IIL,
son of King John (Anno 1246), before Sir Roger
de Thirkilby [and others], justices in eyre there, be-
tween Roger de Quincy Earl of Winchester, and
Roger de Somery. To wit: That the aforesaid
Roger de Somery hath granted for him and his
heirs that the aforesaid earl and his heirs may have
and hold his Park of Bradgate so enclosed as it was
on the octave of St Hilary (January 20) in the
thirty-first year of the aforesaid King Henry with the
‘deer-leaps’ then made therein (cum saltatoriis tunc
zn eo factis). And for thisagreement and grant, the
same earl hath granted for him and his heirs that
the same Roger de Somery and his heirs may enter
at any hour on the forest of him the said earl to
hunt in it with nine bows and six hounds, according
to the form of an Indenture before made between
the aforesaid Roger Earl of Winton and Hugh
d’Albany Earl of Arundel in the King’s court at
Leicester. And if any wild beast wounded by any
of the aforesaid bows shall enter the said park dy
any ‘deer-leap’ or elsewhere, it shall be lawful for
the aforesaid Roger de Somery and his heirs to
send one or two of his men who may follow the
aforesaid beast with the dogs pursuing it within the
aforesaid park, without bows or arrows, and may
DEER-LEAPS 69

take it on the day whereon it was wounded, without
injury to any other beasts in the said park: pro-
vided that if they be footmen they shall enter by
some ‘deer-leap’ or ‘haie’; and if they be horse-
men they shall enter by the gate if it be open; or
otherwise shal] not enter before they wind their
horn for the keeper if he will come.”

The park of Harringworth, Northamptonshire,
within the forest of Rockingham, the principal seat
of the Zouches, is recognised in the third year of
Edward III. (1329), when a license was granted to
William La Zouche to make a ‘‘deer-leap”’ within
the manor.

Lastly may be mentioned Wolseley Park,
Staffordshire, adjoining Cannock Chase, which was
originally inclosed about 1470 by license granted
to Ralph Wolseley, a Baron of the Exchequer in
Edward IV.’s reign. Mr Evelyn Shirley, who in
his English Deer Parks has given an engraving
of the ‘‘deer leap” at Wolseley, as above-
mentioned, refers to it as an existing park, with
the right of deer-leap from the Chase, and regards
it as a unique case of a chartered ‘‘deer-leap”
still exercising its privileges.

Chafin, in his Anecdotes of Cranbourn Chase
(p. 16), quotes an instance of a man forfeiting an
estate adjoining the Chase through his making and
using an unauthorised “deer-leap.” He is stated
to have converted some of the pales on the Chase
side into a sort of pitfall, so that the deer could
easily leap in, but could not get back again; and
to induce them to be thus entrapped they were
70 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

enticed by apple pomace, of which the deer are
particularly fond, and which they can scent from a
long distance. The keepers of the Chase having
reported this to the lord of the manor, litigation
ensued, when an investigation of title-deeds showed
that the owner of the illegal ‘‘deer-leap” was
wrongly seised of the estate he held, his pre-
decessor having had only a grant for life—a dis-
covery which probably would never have been
made had it not been for his assuming the right to
make a “ deer-leap.”

As the narrator of this incident in 1818 was
acquainted with the parties, and cognisant of all
the proceedings, we may regard it as one of the
latest instances on record of the actual use of a
“deer-leap.” Mr Evelyn Shirley, writing in 1867,
refers to the “deer-leap” at Wolseley as ‘‘still
exercising its privileges,” from which we are to
infer that at that date deer (presumably fallow deer)
came in at least occasionably from Cannock Chase.
I have been unable, however, to find any con-
firmatory evidence of the existence of deer in that
Chase at so recent a date. In Garner’s Natural
Flistory of the County of Stafford, published in
1844, no mention is made of their existence
there, although the author of that work speaks of
the former existence of the red deer ‘together
with thousands of fallow deer,” in the same county,
in the forest of Needwood, until its enclosure
at the commencement of the last century. As
Wolseley Park was separated from Needwood on
the north side by the Trent, there can be little
DEER-LEAPS 71

doubt that any deer entering by the “deer-leap”
came in from Cannock Chase, lying to the south
of it.

The red deer, we may presume, have long been
extinct there, or they would have been noticed by
Garner; but it would be interesting to know
whether any wild fallow deer still roam the Chase
as they do in Epping Forest.

Thus far, it will be seen, I have adverted to the
use of the term ‘“‘deer-leap” only in what I con-
ceive to be its original sense. In some parts of
the country it has a different signification, and is
employed to denote a certain space on the boundary
of an ancient forest, intervening between the forest
and the land adjoining. The exact width of this
strip, or leap, is variously estimated in different
parts of the country. In a communication, signed
‘‘Eboracum,” in Zhe /ve/d of December 8, 1883, the
writer says: ‘‘It bears different names in different
localities, as ‘bow rake’ and ‘pale dyke,’ and is
supposed to be nine yards, or as far as a deer can
leap or an arrow be shot—hence ‘bow rake.’”
There must be some mistake however in this in-
terpretation of the term ‘‘bow rake,” for to shoot
an arrow only nine yards would be mere child’s
play. It is more probable that “bow rake” is
equivalent to a bow’s length. The forester of old,
habitually carrying his bow, would always have a
convenient measure at hand, and, instead of step-
ping out yards as we do now, he would lay down
his bow, scratching or ‘‘raking” the soil (A.S.
vacian) with the horn tip of the bow at the end of
72 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

each measured length. His measure then would
be so many ‘“ bow rakes.”

But to return to our “deer-leap.” A con-
tributor to Motes and Queries (2nd ser. ili., p. 137),
writing in 1857, says :—

«Some few years ago I attended the perambula-
tion of a manor in Devonshire. In the course of
our proceedings we came to one side of the manor,
the boundary of which from time immemorial was a
‘deer’s leap’ from the visible and actual boundary
(a bank and wall) which separated the manor we
were perambulating from another, ze., the rights
of the adjoining manor extended a ‘deer’s leap’
into the one we were perambulating.

‘““There were many conflicting opinions as to the
distance of a ‘deer’s leap,’ but it was eventually
decided to dig a spit of turf, as is the usual custom
on such occasions, 24 feet from the bank and wall.”

He adds: ‘“‘I have it from a friend well versed
in business of this nature that the distance of a
deer’s leap is in some districts 24 feet, in others
£2 feet.”

Another writer in the same volume of that use-
ful periodical (iii., p. 195), says :—

“The term ‘deer-leap’ or ‘buck-leap’ was
generally applied to a narrow strip of land adjoin-
ing to and running round the outside of the paling
or fence of an ancient park. The breadth of this
strip was the distance which it was supposed a deer
could leap at one bound; hence its name.”

He adds: ‘‘ The remains of what was said to be
part of the ‘ buck-leap’ at Shirley Park, Derbyshire,
DEER-LEAPS 73

existed within my memory along the side of one
field.”

A description then follows, which shows it to
have resembled the “deer-leap” at Hursley Park,
Hants, already noticed.

There is yet another sense in which the term
‘“‘deer-leap” has been used, namely, to designate
the spot where, on some particular occasion, an
extraordinary leap was made by a deer. In this
sense the word is used by Gilpin in his forest
Scenery, who, at p. 223 of his second volume
(Lauder’s edition), tells us :—

‘In our way to Hound’s Down, we rode past a
celebrated spot called the ‘Deer-leap.’ Here a
stag was once shot, which, in the agony of death,
collecting his force, gave a bound which astonished
those who saw it. It was immediately com-
memorated by two posts, which were fixed at the
two extremities of the leap, where they still remain.
The space between them is somewhat more than
eighteen yards!”

But here surely there must be either a /apsus
calamt or a lapsus memoria.
ANTLERS

So much attention is nowadays paid to the study
of natural history, that there must be few people
who do not know, even if they do not quite under-
stand the process, that deer annually shed their
horns, and in this respect differ remarkably from
antelopes and other hollow -corned ruminants,
whose horns are persistent. A general statement
to this effect may be found in most books dealing
with the natural history of the mammalia; but few
authors afford much information on the subject, or
describe with much clearness what takes place.
Even in so authoritative a work as Bell’s Bretish
Quadrupeds, some curious mistakes on this point
are made. It is stated, for instance, under the
head of “ Red Deer” (p. 349), that ‘‘the annual
shedding takes place shortly after the pairing
season”; and, on the next page, that ‘about
February the old stags drop their antlers.” But
this is not quite correct. The rutting season is in
September and October ; the antlers are not shed,
as a rule, until April or even May, the oldest stags
being the first to lose them. The exact time, in
fact, depends upon the age of the stag and the
temperature of the winter and early spring.
Should the winter be cold and spring protracted,
74
ANTLERS ri

the stags shed their horns as late as May ; the old
ones at the beginning, the young ones at the end
of that month. It is very rarely, however, that

 

AN EXMOOR STAG.

an old stag will carry his old antlers after the
beginning of May; but a two-year-old deer will
do so for a month or two later. Both horns
are not always shed at the same time; one
of them, perhaps, will be retained for a day or two
after the other.
76 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

In a few days after the old horns have dropped,
the new growth shows itself, and gradually the new
antlers are developed. They are then covered
with a thick “velvet,” which preserves the point, as
yet soft and tender, from injury. While in this
soft condition they are very sensitive, and, to avoid
injury by striking them against trees, the deer
leads a life of retirement. In about twelve weeks
they are full-grown, and, as they gradually harden,
the animal rubs them against a tree to get rid of
the ‘‘velvet.” This can only be done gradually, and
a stag may often be seen at that time of year
with the “velvet” hanging in strips, being only
partially detached from the horns. The weight of
the antlers in a full-grown stag varies, according to
their size and massiveness, from ten or twelve to
fifteen pounds.

In the Zoologischer Garten for February 1866
will be found an interesting article by Dr Soemmer-
ing on the growth of deer horns, a translation of
which, together with an illustration, appeared in
The Freld of July 21, 1886. It contains a careful
description of the progressive growth of the new
horn, with figures showing the altered appearance
presented at intervals of a few days between the
middle of March and the end of May.

Antlers differ but little in their composition
from true bone, and chiefly in the proportion of
their constituents. Ordinary bone consists of
about one-third part of animal matter or
gelatine, and two-thirds of earthy matter, about
six-sevenths of which is phosphate of lime
ANTLERS 77

and one-seventh carbonate of lime with an
appreciable trace of magnesia. The animal
matter gives the bone elasticity and tenacity,
the earthy matter hardness and rigidity.

ee

 

A “ROYAL” FROM INVERNESS-SHIRE.

Deer horn consists of about thirty-nine parts of
animal matter and sixty-one parts of earthy matter
of the same kind and proportions as is found in
ordinary bone. This is the mean of many results
of analysis of antlers of different species of deer by
different processes, amongst which are very slight
78 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

differences in results. This excess of animal
matter seems necessary to give the antlers
elasticity and strength, and adapt them to the
purpose for which they are designed.

What becomes of the old horns is a question
which is often asked, the inquirers usually averring,
and with some truth, that they are seldom or never
to be seen lying about. The explanation of this is
really not far to seek. In the first place, it must
often happen that the horns are dropped in out-of-
the-way places, amongst underwood, or in heather,
where they are lost to sight, and seldom discovered
unless by a systematic search for them, or by
accident. In the next place, park-keepers and
foresters keep a pretty sharp look-out for them in
the course of their daily rounds, knowing well their
value to the cutlers for knife handles, and to the
saddlers for whip handles. And in the third place,
the deer themselves help to get rid of them by
eating them. The question is asked from time to
time whether this can be true, and whether it is
possible that deer can gnaw at all in the proper
sense of the word, having no incisor teeth in the
upper jaw, but only a hard callous pad, against
which the lower incisors can only cut off grass and
leaves in the same way that cows do with similar
dentition. But they have powerful molars, or
grinding teeth, quite strong enough to bite and
break off boughs with, and to gnaw or crunch up
bones; and there can be no doubt that they use
them for that purpose.

Scrope, in his Days of Deer-stalking, states
ANTLERS 79

that hinds have been seen to eat the shed horns.
One, he says, will consume a part, and when she
drops it, it will be taken up and gnawed by the
others. He adds that “the late Duke of Athol
once found a dead hind which had been choked by
a part of the horn that remained sticking in her
throat.” The author of that entertaining and now
scarce book, Zhe Chase of the Wild Red Deer,
the late Mr C. P. Collyns, was assured by keepers
and hillmen of great experience and undoubted
veracity in Scotland, that it is acommon occurrence
for hinds to eat the cast horns, though he was
never able to confirm it from his own experience in
Devonshire and Somersetshire. In Zhe Field of
January 23, 1858, ‘‘A Highlander” wrote, saying:
‘“As to what becomes of the horns annually shed by
deer, I can answer, from actual observation, that
very many of them are eaten, or at least munched
up by other deer. A deer, either stag or hind, I
have seldom seen passing a fallen horn without
gnawing it; and very rarely indeed have I seen a
shed horn that was not partially gnawed. It is
said that the stags conceal their horns, when shed
in soft places. I have never seen them do so; but
the finest specimens of shed horns I have ever
found were during the summer's drought, where
the waters of some bog had nearly disappeared. I[
never found an entire horn except in water or
moss.” Lord Lovat, who has referred to the
subject in his chapter on “ Deer-stalking” con-
tributed to the volume on Moor and Marsh
Shooting in the ‘Badminton Library,” says:
80 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

‘Unless picked up very soon, these shed horns are
rarely found whole. Both hinds and stags are
very fond of eating them, as they are of any bones
they may find.”

At a meeting of the Zoological Society in
December 1883, Sir Joseph Fayrer exhibited some
deer horns which he had picked up at Dunrobin,
and which had in great part been eaten away,as he
thought probable, by deer,'although (as he remarked)
“it was difficult to conceive how a deer, with its
toothless upper jaw” (he meant zz front only)
“could eat a hard bone; for such is a shed horn.”
His surmises, however, were doubtless correct, and
were confirmed by the subsequent receipt of several
more horns that had been partially gnawed by deer
in the same forest, and were sent up by Mr James
Inglis, the head keeper at Dunrobin. In a letter
which accompanied these specimens, Mr Inglis
wrote :—

“T asked the stalkers to keep a look-out, and see
if they could find any deer eating horns, and am
glad to say that they have been able to put the
matter beyond all doubt. Donald M‘Rae saw with
his glass a stag in Dunrobin Glen eating a horn.
He went to the place where he saw him eating it,
and found it partially eaten. I send it with the
others. You will find a ticket on it to distinguish
it from the rest. Duncan M‘Pherson saw with his
glass a hind last week (December 1883) eating a
horn also; he did not find the horn, but he saw the

‘One of these horns was subsequently figured in Matuz,
December 20, 1883.
ANTLERS 31

hind quite plainly with it in her mouth, gnawing
away at it near the point. He added that a
shepherd, in the parish of Lairg, had a cow that
ate all the bones she could find, going miles for
them, and eating up shank bones and all; the ribs
being eaten easily, and seeming to give no trouble
whatever.”

Not only is it a fact, then, that deer eat the old
horns that are shed every year, but they will also
gnaw at them when they have a chance Jefore they
are shed. The late Sir Thomas Moncrieffe in-
formed Dr Buchanan White, of Perth, that he once
watched a hind gnawing the tines of the horns on
a stag that was lying beside her, and which he
afterwards shot.

Mr Overton, the head keeper at Bradgate Park,
near Leicester, where both red and fallow deer are
kept, states that he has not the least doubt of their
eating each other’s horns. He has himself noticed
several cases in which both the broad antlers and
top points had been gnawed off, and had also seen
Scotch heads that had been quite spoiled by the
tines having been gnawed, which he thought must
have been done after the horn had become hard
and whilst the owner of it was still living.

Fallow deer, as well as red deer, have the same
propensity and liking apparently for the saline
flavour of the cast horn. I have several times picked
up fragments of antlers thus gnawed in parks where
only fallow deer are kept. Doubtless the habit is
common to all deer.

The character of heads, as every deer-stalker

Fr
82 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

knows, varies in different forests; there are usually
most points where there is most wood, or good
winter feeding and shelter. It is the opinion of
Lord Lovat, as stated inthe volume above referred
to, that in hill deer heads go on improving up to
the age of twelve or fifteen years; on low ground,
with more forcing food, they come to maturity
sooner. The heads then remain about the same for
some years, after which they gradually lose beam,
get smoother from the blood vessels being no
longer so vigorous, the points taper more, and are
shorter, till finally the head dwindles to half its
former size.

The late Duke of Athole collected and preserved
the shed horns of certain park stags that were
known, and whose horns could be found and
identified as soon as dropped, and he noticed that
at the age of twelve or thirteen they began to
deteriorate.

Some years ago Mr J. Clarke, of Lynton, being
anxious to settle certain points in connection with
the growth of deer horns, upon which a difference
of opinion prevailed, conceived the idea of keeping
a red stag in a paddock under his own immediate
supervision, and making regular observations upon
it, till it reached the condition of a fully-grown adult
animal. This he carried out, published the result of
his observations in Zhe ze/d of November 11, 1865,
and subsequently in a small pamphlet printed at
Barnstaple in 1866, but which has long been out of
print and unprocurable. It has been reprinted,
however, in Zhe Zoologist for September 1884, and
ANTLERS 83

is well worth reading by those whoare interested in
the matter, as are also the criticisms thereon (printed
in the succeeding number for October) by Lord
Ebrington, whose experience as master of the
Devon and Somerset Staghounds enabled him to
write authoritatively on the subject.

The question is sometimes asked whether it is
possible to tell the age of a stag by his horns.
The late Rev. J. Boyce, one of the oldest stag-
hunters in the county of Devon, on being asked
this question, replied, ‘‘ No,” and that the only way
in which the different ages could be possibly ascer-
tained was to keep observation on one and the
same animal for several years in confinement,
as in the experiment made by Mr Clarke, of
Lynton. Since then the subject has been more
fully investigated and elucidated, and in the Natural
History Museum may now be seen a series of cast
horns from the same animal, showing the appear-
ance they present at different ages.
A WET DAY ON THE HILL

Mucu of the enjoyment to be derived from deer-
stalking in Scotland is, no doubt, due to the
beautiful wild scenery amongst which the sport is
pursued. The heather-clad hills, the steep corries,
the great grey boulders relieved here and there
with patches of bracken, the peaty burn meander-
ing down the hillside amidst stones and slabs, and
mosses of lovely texture and varied hues, all
combine to form a landscape suz generis, such as
can be found nowhere but in bonnie Scotland. If
to these surroundings we add the placid surface of
a loch lying far below us as we look down from a
heathery knoll, or a broad blue arm of the sea
running in between rocky islets round which the
wings of seafowl gleam white in the distance, we
complete a picture of which the eye can never
weary, and which inspires a feeling of restful
enjoyment as delightful to experience as it is
difficult to describe. But much will naturally
depend on the weather. Given a clear day, with
not too strong a light, and a moderate wind, all
may go well; but should a mist descend from the
hill, or alight drizzling rain continue to fall steadily,
not only will the chances of sport be considerably
reduced, but the enjoyment of the day may be
84
A WET DAY ON THE HILL 85

entirely spoilt. Amidst such wild surroundings,
however, it need not be supposed that enjoyment
arises solely from success in compassing the death
ofa deer. There is a pleasure in contemplating,
even at a respectful distance, the free, unfettered
movements of a wild stag, or the picturesque
attitudes of a lot of hinds while still unsuspicious
of danger. If as you approach them a solitary
Blackcock springs from some bracken by the burn-
side, or a pack of Grouse go streaming away to
give alarm to the deer, you see in the appearance
of the startled herd another charming picture of
wild life in the Highlands. Whether you get a
shot or no, seems scarcely to matter. You have
seen what you came out to see—a wild red deer.
You have watched him while still unconscious of
your presence, you have noticed his demeanour
when first he took your wind, you have marvelled
at his keen sight, his wonderful sense of smell, and,
as soon as he moves, his extraordinary pace over
rough ground, where at every step he seems to
risk a broken limb, until at length he has dis-
appeared from view, and the -corrie holds only the
Grouse which have given him timely notice to
quit.

Many a time and oft while tramping over the
hill with the rifle still in its cover, and the drizzling
rain descending gently but coldly, even in
September, have I stood still and felt a greater
pleasure in contemplating the changing moods of
Nature than in looking for the chance of a shot.
Sometimes, indeed, through sheer carelessness and
86 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

neglect of the proper use of the spy-glass, have I
let a good stag go away unharmed, and solaced
myself with a loving stare at an Eagle perched
on a crag above me, or a pair of soaring Buzzards
higher still.

As an example of a day’s enjoyment without
sport while in the midst of opportunities for it, a
day in September comes vividly to mind. Even
the date is accurately remembered—the 26th—as
marking the first fall of snow that year, and the
extraordinary change of temperature’ which
accompanied the pursuit of Grouse and Ptarmigan
within a fortnight of shooting Partridges under a
burning sun in a southern county.

The first look out from the window on
awakening was not reassuring. A light rain and
leaden grey clouds betokened a repetition of the
weather of the day before. It might or might not
improve as the day wore on—there was no saying ;
and one had to decide whether to shoot or stalk, or
stay at home and try to sketch the loch from the
windows of the lodge. Exercise of some sort was
decided upon. Whether one got wet through or
no, seemed of little consequence. We were getting
used to it after a week’s training, and to come in
at dusk well soaked, to enjoy a warm bath and a
change, seemed only part and parcel of the
daily routine, no matter what was the sport in
view.

Stalking, then, being the order of the day, and
breakfast over, we fling on our shooting capes,
pull our caps over our eyes, and start for the hill.
A WET DAY ON THE HILL 87

A tramp of two miles puts us in good marching
order before reaching the ground we have in view
as the scene of the day’s operations. As we sit
down to spy the face of the opposite hill, one by
one we pick up the ruddy coats of recumbent deer,
at times almost invisible until lit up by a gleam of
sunshine on the passing of a cloud. Then they
seem to stand out sharp and clear, and their coats
shine bright by comparison with the brown heath
amongst which they are lying. We can count
them easily, but they are all hinds and small stags,
not worth a stalker’s attention.

As we continue our ascent, the rain gets colder,
turns to sleet, and finally to snow, until by the time
we have reached the summit, nearly 3000 feet
above sea level, our jackets and caps are as white
as the surrounding rocks. One can_ scarcely
believe it is the middle of September. So stealthy
and unobtrusive are our movements that the Grouse
hardly perceive us, or, if they do, are unwilling to
take wing. A bonnie brood unexpectedly and
closely approached, whirr round the shoulder of the
hill and disappear in the blinding snow. On the
way up we are reminded of the loneliness of the
place by the occasional hoarse croak of a Raven, a
pair of which share the solitude of the crags with
more than one pair of Buzzards. Before the snow
fell, and while yet a fitful gleam of sunshine
illumined the rocks, three of the latter birds came
into view, soaring in circles, and almost deluding
us into the belief that they were Eagles, so large
did they appear on outspread wings when seen at
88 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

no great distance. But the Eagle was there, too.
High above all, and perched upon a lofty crag, he
sat so still that he would have escaped notice
altogether had he not given a vigorous shake of
his wings to get rid of the falling snow just as our
spy-glass was slowly sweeping the skyline. We
sat down to have a longer look at him, and all we
wished for was a better light. He was within
range of a rifle, and for a moment we calculated
the distance and speculated on the result of a shot.
But the idea was at once dismissed as_ base.
Eagles were too seldom seen to be treated in that
fashion, and the pleasure of seeing one alive amid
such wild surroundings far outweighed any
satisfaction that could arise from contemplating
his lifeless form. All that we thought of doing
was to get as near as possible to him before he
took wing. Nearer and nearer we approached,
until at length the huge pinions were unfolded
and with two mighty flaps the great bird launched
itself in the air and flew heavily out of sight.
Hardly had the Eagle disappeared from view
when we found ourselves sooner than we expected
in the haunts of Ptarmigan. A brood rose within
twenty yards of us, and, flying a short distance,
pitched again in a spot which we could easily reach.
So tame did we find them that we were able to sit
down within shot of them and have a good look at
them through our glasses. It was a great treat to
observe at such close quarters these most inacces-
sible of all British birds. Inaccessible, that is, as
regards their lofty haunts, but tame enough when
A WET DAY ON THE HILL 89

found, because seldom visited or disturbed. <A
second brood later on afforded a similar chance

. NN
ee )
\i

   
     

A ROYAL.
(From an Original Sketch by Captain H. Hart Davis.)

for observation, and had we been armed with a gun
instead of a rifle in its cover, it would have been
easy to have secured two brace.
90 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Our thoughts on leaving home were of deer,
but as yet no chance had offered fora stalk. We
had seen a few hinds and small stags, but none
worth attention, and it looked as if the rifle was to
be carried home without a shot being fired. We
had decided to go right over the hill and return
home by another route, and cautiously commenced
the descent. This was necessary for two reasons.
First, in order not to disturb any deer that might
be lying below us, and, secondly, because the great
round boulders over which we had to pass were
extremely slippery with their caps of snow. It was
well we paused to reconnoitre, for about a hundred
yards below us on the far side of a huge boulder
lay a stag. Only the tops of his antlers were
visible from our position, and we judged him to be
a stag of ten. He could not see us from where he
lay, and the wind was right. Here, then, late in
the afternoon, was the chance for which we had
been looking all day. Cautiously the downhill
stalk was commenced, and for a short distance all
went well. Suddenly, to our dismay, we found
ourselves in a cul-de-sac. Huge boulders rose in
front and on both sides of us. It was impossible
to advance another yard, and there was nothing for
it but to retrace our steps, make a slight détour to
the left, and again advance. The danger was that
this détour might just clear the rock behind which
the stag was lying, and that he would then see us.
Whether this is what happened, whether he
winded us, or heard the occasional clatter of the
big loose stones over which we had to crawl cannot
A WET DAY ON THE HILL gI

now be explained. Suffice it to say, that on
looking in the direction of his particular rock, we
saw, to our chagrin, that the antlers had dis-
appeared, We had hardly realised the fact that he
was gone before we viewed him striding down hill
to the left, and at a good pace considering the
badness of the ground. It was not an easy shot

 

 

 

 

A DOWNHILL SHOT.

(From an Original Sketch by Captain H. Hart Davis.)
and—it was missed. Sufficient allowance had not
been made for the animal’s continuous descent, and
the bullet had sped over him. It was mortifying
enough at the time, but proved a wholesome lesson.
The rifle was returned to its cover, and as we
tramped homeward in the dusk we found consola-
tion in the fact that, if we had not killed a deer, we
had seen much to compensate us for the disappoint-
ment.
THE WAYS OF GROUSE

Many an enthusiastic Grouse shooter has been heard
to express regret that he knows so little of the bird
which provides him in August with such excellent
sport. He has not time, he says, to learn much
about its mode of life. He sees it only for six weeks
or a couple of months in the year, and at a season
when, intent on killing it, observation of its habits is
rendered difficult by reason of its wildness. By
every means inhis power he renders it so unapproach-
able that, in order to see it at all, he has toemploy a
long line of “drivers” to send it flying over his head ;
and in lieu of watching at close quarters one of the
handsomest birds in the British game list, he can
only contemplate its dead body when it has fallen to
his unerring aim. A dead Grouse lying in a patch
of purple heather is truly a thing of beauty, and
cannot but evoke the greatest admiration ; yet, if
the sportsman be also a naturalist, he will hardly
repress a feeling of regret at having killed a creature
so surpassingly beautiful. The first thing probably
that will strike him is the harmonious colouring of
the bird’s plumage; harmonious, that is, with the
natural surroundings of the moor on which it lives.
A delicate blending of the brown and yellow tints of
autumn, relieved here and there with a fleck of
white, and a sombre patch of black upon the breast
g2
THE WAYS OF GROUSE 93

that simulates the shadows which lie beneath the
brown heather stalks. Crowning the short mottled
feathers of the head is the little scarlet comb which
might easily be mistaken, while the bird is at rest,
for a brilliant flower of the heath amidst which it

 

A DEAD GROUSE.
(From an Original Sketch by G. E. Lodge.)

reposes. It is impossible to conceive a more beauti-
ful combination of colours, or one more admirably
adapted to favour the bird’s concealment from its
enemies, especially from the soaring Falcon, at
whose approach the Grouse crouch low, and remain
motionless so long as it remains in sight.
94 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

To see Grouse at their best the observer should
visit the moors in spring, when Nature is awakening
from the long sleep of winter, when the heather is
sprouting, and the packs are breaking up in prepara-
tion for the nesting season. Freedom from molesta-
tion for a few months has restored confidence in
the scared birds. No longer driven hither and
thither over hill and dale, they are settling down
quietly, and once more will suffer a near approach
without alarm; for on warm days in spring, just
before they begin to nest, Grouse will sit closer than
at any other time of year. When pairing com-
mences they become restless, the cocks chasing the
hens on the wing with a sharp zig-zag flight like a
Snipe.

Grouse are most plentiful in the zone between
1000 feet and 1500 feet, and do not go much above
1700 feet. Spots where bilberries ripen, kept moist
by springs, and with a southerly exposure, attract
them in autumn, though they may be under a
northern ledge in spring. For their nests they like
broad shallow hollows with springs at the edges, and
a flat ridge at least on one side on which to crow and
sunthemselves. They build also in the peat, in deep
stream courses. The nest, seven or eight inches.
across, is made of rushes or grass, with a few
feathers. The eggs, usually from seven to ten in
number, are handsomely mottled like the birds’ own
feathers with reddish-brown and buff, a style of
colouration which favours their concealment from
most prying eyes, save those of the Hoodie Crow and
the Rook, which persistently hunt for them,
THE WAYS OF GROUSE 95

The greatest number of eggs are laid during the
first fortnight in May, though a good many may be
laid in April if the weather is favourable. Incuba-
tion lasts twenty-four days, and the critical time for
the young birds is during the first fortnight of their
existence. If during the month of June the
weather happens to be cold and wet, numbers
of chicks perish, and unless second broods
are reared, a marked deficit will be observed in the
supply of Grouse when the shooting season comes
round, Even the old birds are affected by the state
of the weather at nesting time, for on this depends
the condition of the heather tops on which they
chiefly subsist. The quantity consumed by each
bird daily is surprising. The writer once took from
the crop of a hen Grouse a mass of fresh heath tops
weighing 24 oz. At this rate, to support 1000
brace of Grouse a moor would have to yield nearly a
ton of heather tops per week. What ademand must
be made on Dame Nature to keep up this supply,
and how important that the weather should conduce
toa healthy and continuous crop! No wonder that
the Grouse should suffer when the heather is blighted
by late frosts !

Fortunately, they do not depend entirely upon
this kind of food, for, although they feed largely
upon the fresh tops of the common ling (Cadduna
vulgaris) and the fine-leaved heath (Zvica cinerea),
which are reduced to pulp by the action of the
gizzard, they get plenty of insect food in summer,
especially caterpillars, and subsist largely on the fruit
of the bilberry, cranberry, and crowberry (Zmpetrum
96 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

nigrum), of which they are particularly fond. In
the autumn they visit the oatfields, and in winter,
when driven off the moors by heavy snowstorms,
they have been found feeding on the farmsteads on
hips and haws. In January 1886, on some of the
Yorkshire moors, the snow was more than a foot in
depth above the heather, and large drifts formed on
a very extensive scale. The Grouse suffered
severely, being quite unable to penetrate the frozen
mass for food, and in consequence they left the
moors for the lower cultivated ground to an extent
never previously observed. A field of turnips was
swarming with the starving birds which vainly at-
tempted with numerous Partridges to scratch down
for food. The Grouse were perched on the fences,
feeding on the berries like so many Fieldfares, and
on several occasions they alighted on the branches
of trees. As far as one could see, they had aban-
doned the moors, and were feeding miles away in
the cultivated districts on anything they could get
in the way of food.

The flying powers of Grouse, although at times
extremely rapid, are, according to Mr Millais, far
inferior in point of endurance to either Blackgame
or Capercaillie. They seldom cover distances ex-
ceeding two miles at one stretch unless unusually
harassed in stormy weather, or scared from their
ground by hawks or the artificial kite. The usual
length of a Grouse’s flight ranges from a quarter to
three-quarters of a mile, depending on the nature of
the ground over which they are passing, being, as a
rule, much shorter on heather flats, where they have
THE WAYS OF GROUSE 97

numerous and agreeable resting-places, than on
broken ground and rocky hill faces.

As to the rate of speed at which a Grouse travels
when going at his best pace various estimates have
been given, but in most cases they have been mere
guesses. Perhaps the nearest approach to truth was
achieved by the late Major Fisher, who, in the
writer's presence, once flew a trained Falcon at a
Grouse which saved itself by dashing into a planta-
tion exactly a mile from the place where the
bird rose. The flight was timed with a stop
watch, and the distance was covered in fifty-eight
seconds. Being in front of a pursuing Falcon, it
may be assumed that the Grouse in its efforts to
escape was flying at its highest rate of speed.

The average weight of an old Grouse is from
20 oz. to 24 0z. The heaviest Scotch birds have
been found to weigh 28 oz., and some have been
killed in Orkney weighing as much as 30 0z. Asa
rule, cock birds weigh about 3 oz. more than hens,
the weight depending upon the abundance of good
food that the birds are able to obtain, as well as
upon freedom from disease.

The subject of Grouse disease is one that cannot
be discussed in a fewlines. It has claimed the atten-
tion of so many observers, and evoked so many dif-
ferent opinions, that it would be impossible in the space
here available to deal with the various views which
have been expressed. It must suffice to state a few
facts as briefly as possible. The late Dr Cobbold,
a high authority on the nature and development of
parasites, considered that the disease was due to

G
98 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

infestation of the birds by a thread worm (or
nematoid) Strongylus pergracilis—while tape-worms
were also credited with helping a fatal result. But
the parasitic theory is disposed of on the simple
ground that hardly a Grouse is found to be free
from worms in its digestive system, and healthy
birds are found to possess both forms of worms
independently of any symptoms of Grouse disease.
The late Mr John Colquhoun, author of Zhe Moor
and the Loch, as well as Dr D. G. Macdonald, who
has written a volume on the subject, regarded the
weakening of the bird’s constitution by such causes
as bad seasons, insufficient food, and overstocking
as the prime factors in inducing the ailment, but
such opinions, while deserving of consideration,
leave the idea of a specific cause undiscussed.
Both Dr Farquharson and Dr Andrew Wilson have
expressed their belief that Grouse disease is an
epidemic and infectious fever, characterised by
inflammatory symptoms of the respiratory and
digestive organs. Dr Klein, recognising its in-
fectious nature, is convinced that it is due to the
multiplication in the body of the bird of a specific
germ, whose conveyance from the sick to the
healthy Grouse accounts for the spread of the
disease. The chief changes he finds in the
lungs, while congestion of the liver is also a con-
spicuous sign. In 1887 he went to Scotland at the
request of the Editor of Zhe Fie/d, for the express
purpose of investigating the cause of Grouse
disease. By making cultures from the blood of
Grouse which had succumbed to the disease, he
THE WAYS OF GROUSE 99

succeeded in communicating what he regarded as
the disease to other creatures, but not to healthy
Grouse. By this omission he failed to prove that
he had really discovered the bacteria of Grouse
disease and (as pointed out in 7he Times of 13th
August 1904) this was the weak point in his argu-
ment. But if he was not successful in finding
the specific microbe of the disease, it is nevertheless
probable that bacteria of some kind are the primary
cause of it. The inquiry for a remedy is not easily
answered. The only measures likely to be avail-
able in checking the disease are not so easy of
application. It is all very wel] to advise that a
sharp look-out should be kept for Grouse which
are affected, and that these should be killed and
cremated to prevent the diffusion of germs; but
one cannot look over Grouse on a moor as if
they were chickens in a poultry yard, nor diagnose
their condition when on the wing at a distance.
A great many diseased birds are sure to escape
detection, until, tod late, they are found dead or
dying. Heather burning has much to recommend
it, and, as at present advised, we have more faith
in that and in the avoidance of overstocking than in
any other so-called preventives. An examination
of statistics has shown that in most cases the Grouse
disease has appeared in the year following an
unusually good season. The ground has been
overstocked, and when the birds have exhausted
the supply of good nourishing food in the shape of
young heather they have to fall back on the old and
rank stuff, which naturally proves deleterious.
100 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

From independent observation we are inclined to
believe that the supply of drinking water may have
something to do with it. Grouse, like other game
birds, must have water, and so long as they can drink
from the burns or the little rills of pure water that
trickle down the hillsides all goes well; but should
there come a dry summer, when the running water
fails, they are obliged to have recourse to the small
stagnant pools on the low ground, which may
produce a species of typhoid comparable to that
which attacks our troops on the march when
compelled to drink unwholesome water. To
substantiate this view it would be desirable to
ascertain whether the outbreaks of Grouse disease
have invariably occurred when the moors have been
in this waterless condition.
BLACKCOCK SHOOTING

Ir is not every Grouse moor that is favoured with
the presence of Blackgame. Much depends upon
the situation, the proximity of larch and birch
plantations in which to roost, and a sufficient extent
of low-lying moist ground, devoid of heather, but
abounding in rushes, whereon the Blackgame find
acceptable food. In spring they feed much on the
cotton grass (Lriophorum vaginatum) and the buds
of the bog myrtle; in summer, heather tops, pine
leaves and shoots ; in autumn, acorns, oats, seeds of
the rush (commonly called “ sprit”), and berries of
Vaccinium myrtillus ; in winter, the catkins of the
alder and berries of the rowan tree and juniper.
From this it will be seen that Grouse and Blackgame
do not feed exactly on the same kind of food,
although in summer they may both be seen picking
at the heather tops, and in autumn both visit the
oat stubbles, and alight in company upon the stooks
to pluck the ripening grain.

It has been asserted by some writers — for
example, by Robert Gray, in his Brads of the West
of Scotland—that Blackgame drive away the Grouse.
I have never had any satisfactory proof of this.
Having observed both species together on the

oatfields, and seen them come over the guns
Io!
102 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

together in a Grouse drive, when a Blackcock would
fall to the first shot and immediately afterwards a
Grouse to the second barrel, I have long regarded
them as dwelling in harmony, although, in con-
sequence of the difference in their diet, they often
affect quite different ground at feeding time. Long
before Gray’s work was published, Charles St John
wrote: ‘‘I do not consider that they at all interfere
with each other. The same description of ground
is not liked by both kinds of birds. The Blackcock
prefers rocky hillsides, with plantations, and bogg
pieces of ground clothed with coarse grass and
different kinds of marsh plants; while the Grouse
delights in wide, open tracts, where the heather is
not too rank, and where there is plenty of young
heath, on the shoots of which they feed.” But
although the Blackgame will not drive away the
Grouse, it is a fact that Pheasants will cause Black-
game to forsake their chosen haunts if introduced
in the coverts to which they are in the habit of
resorting. For this reason owners and lessees of
Grouse ground where Blackgame are also to be found
should think twice before they decide upon turning
out Pheasants in the coverts merely with a view
to make a variety in the bag during the shoot-
ing season. It is surely wiser to preserve the
Blackgame where they exist ina country that suits
them, and look for Pheasants later in the season in
coverts where there are no Blackgame to be
disturbed.

A good day’s Blackgame shooting presupposes
the presence of several guns, to be posted in likely
BLACKCOCK SHOOTING 103

places for a shot, and the attendance of a sufficient
number of beaters to drive the ground properly
towards them. But it will be conceded by those
who have ever tried it that there is a great charm in
wandering alone, or at most with a couple of

 

A GROUP OF BLACKGAME.

beaters, through the birch woods in autumn, on the
mere chance of getting a shot or two at such
splendid game birds. If no such chance presents
itself, much enjoyment may still be derived from the
mere attempt to get a shot, while, should a brace be
secured single-handed, one feels much prouder of
the achievement than if one had assisted to fill the
104 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

game cart with Pheasants. The fact is,a Blackcock
takes a deal more “ getting,” as the phrase is, than
acock Pheasant, and, when bent on such an errand
single-handed everything must be shaped to that
end. Other game for the moment must be
disregarded. This, of course, does not apply when
one is walking over an open moor, where Grouse and
Snipe are likely to be met with, and where Black-
game will often rise from the heather within shot,
especially if one is shooting over dogs. But in the
coverts, when the birds are sitting on the birch
trees, or on the horizontal branches of the larches,
listening to every sound that indicates the approach
of an intruder, if a Blackcock is wanted, everything
else should be unmolested. A crossing rabbit
every now and then may offer a tempting shot, and
a hare may sit up occasionally just to show where he
is ; butashot at either would be fatal to success with
the nobler game.

Well do I remember an excursion of this kind
one day towards the end of September. It had
been raining all the morning, and Grouse-hawking,
which was the order of the day, was voted impos-
sible. The Hawks were all ready, and in great form,
for they had been flying, some of them, nearly
every day since August 12, and had acquitted them-
selves well. The rain had now come to spoil sport
in that direction, and the question was, what was
to be done? Inthe lone house on the moor there
was no billiard table (that unfailing resource in
other houses on a wet day), and, my host having
decided to stay indoors and write letters, I was left
BLACKCOCK SHOOTING 105

tomy own devices, to amuse myself as best I could.
Twelve o’clock had come and gone, and the
weather showed no sign of improvement. A thin,
drizzling rain descended gently, yet steadily. The
moor steamed with the evaporating moisture, and
the birch trees dripped heavily at every sough of
wind. There were no Grouse crowing, and the
outlook was dreary in the extreme. The few
Blackgame that haunted the moor by day and
roosted in the plantations near the house were not
numerous enough to make it worth while to
organise a big drive, and yet there was a possi-
bility for a single gun, with luck, to get a shot or
two by stratagem. Rather than stay indoors all
day, I resolved to try it, and, flinging on an old
shooting cape, sallied forth with two beaters. The
state of the weather was such that it seemed likely
the Blackgame would be sheltering in the woods,
and the plan of campaign was soon settled. The
most promising beat was a wooded ravine not far
from the house, where the covert sloped down on
either side to a burn, which debouched upon an
open glade in which stood a big ash tree. My
plan was to send the two beaters round to the far
end of the wood, which they were to enter on
opposite sides of the burn, and beat slowly towards
the big ash tree, behind which I had elected to
stand. It seemed to me that a Blackcock, on
whichever side of the burn he might be found,
would probably fly straight down the ravine
towards the open moor, and would thus have to
pass me on the way. At all events, this seemed
106 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the most feasible project with only one gun in
reserve.

Accordingly, we proceeded to carry it out, and
for the time being the beaters disappeared from
view. After along and cheerless wait in the rain
to give them time to get to the farther end of the
beat, I was suddenly apprised of their approach by
a shout of ‘“‘ Blackcock over!” ‘‘ Mark Blackcock !””
Anxiously I clutched the gun, pushing forward the
safety-bolt ; but from where I stood no Blackcock
was to be seen, and | learnt afterwards that it had
gone out on my right. A second bird soon after-
wards came flying down the burn, but swerved to
the left, and crossing an angle of the wood, passed
out of shot, making for the moor, where I marked
itdown. The beaters were now within hail, and I
had almost despaired of a shot, when a third Black-
cock rose between us. The men both shouted, one
on each side of the burn, and the bird, taking a
middle course, came straight down the ravine in
my direction, proving (in this instance at least) the
fallacy of the proverb 2% medio tutisstmus rb2s, for
in another second it had passed clear of the ash
tree, and in response to the shot fell headlong into
a patch of high bracken. This was encouraging,
but the wood held no more; the beaters emerged,
and we decided to follow the bird I had marked
down on the moor, walking towards the spot in
line. The previous disturbance, however, had un-
settled him, or the wet heather made him restless.
At anyrate, he rose out of shot, and went straight
away, to pitch in some bracken on the side of a hill,
BLACKCOCK SHOOTING 107

an easy spot to mark. Seeing that we were not
likely to get near him by advancing, I halted the
beaters, and expressed my intention of outgeneral-
ing that wily Blackcock by stealing a march upon
him. The beaters were to remain where they were
for fifteen minutes, while I was to make a aétour to
the left, cross the moor, and then swing round to
the right behind the shoulder of the hill on which
our quarry was resting. This ruse had the desired
effect. At the appointed time the beaters ad-
vanced, and I had not been long in ambush when
the welcome cry was heard “Mark over!” Ina
few seconds the bird came swinging round the hill,
following, as it seemed, the curve of the ground.
As the gun went up he saw me and swerved, but
too late to save himself. He was barely thirty
yards off, and fell to an easy shot. The beaters
were delighted, and so, in truth, was the shooter.
To have found three Blackcock and killed two of
them was considered good enough for one after-
noon, and as we tramped back to the house, the
thorough drenching which we had undergone was
forgotten in the triumph of the moment.
THE DECREASE OF BLACKGAME

Except in Somerset, Devon, and the New Forest,
where the commencement of Blackgame shooting is
deferred until September 1, the season for this fine
game bird opens on August 20 and ends with the
shooting of Red Grouse on December io. Sad to say,
the sport which it now affords is not what it used to
be. There was atime when Blackgame was spread
all over the country from north to south, wherever
the conditions were favourable to its mode of living,
and its existence at the present time in the west of
England, side by side with the red deer, is only a
survival, owing to the unchanged nature of its
ancient haunts. For we have to remember that
the Blackcock comes of a very ancient race, indi-
genous to Britain long before the introduction of
the Pheasant, which has since ousted it in so many
directions. In proportion as the wilder parts of
the country suited to its habits have remained un-
altered, it contrives to hold its own, though in far
fewer numbers than formerly. Needless to say, it
is a moorland bird, often living where Red Grouse
are, but oftener where there are none or very few,
for the nature of its haunts is somewhat different.
The Red Grouse lie out on the open moor, where

they find no cover but heather in profusion; the
108
THE DECREASE OF BLACKGAME 109

Blackgame affect the rough, hilly ground bordering
cultivated land, where there are plantations of fir
and birch, in which they perch like Pheasants, hid-
ing in the thick bracken on the sides of the hills,
drawing down to the rushy bottoms and moist
ground about the burns, where they find most of
their daily fare, and visiting the oatfields at twi-
light. They may even be found sometimes in fields
of roots or potatoes, at some distance from their
usual haunts, for they are strong fliers, and when
crossing a valley or travelling at a height look
something like Wild Ducks, flying in a straight line
with outstretched heads and necks. In their fond-
ness for acorns and oats they also remind one of
Ducks, and, like them, come off the moor at sun-
down in search of this kind of food. In the early
morning they may be seen flying out from the birch
woods and making for the patches of bracken on
the hillsides, their black and white plumage show-
ing up finely against such a background in the
gleam of the rising sun.

The best districts for Blackgame in Scotland,
according to Mr Millais, are Dumfriesshire, Rox-
burgh, and parts of Perthshire, Inverness, and
Aberdeenshire; and in England, Westmorland,
Cumberland, and Northumberland, the borders of
Durham and Yorkshire, Shropshire, and Stafford-
shire. Up to a comparatively recent date good
bags of Blackgame were made on Exmoor and the
neighbouring hills in Somersetshire, where, for
example, on September 1, 1884, two guns killed
twenty-seven brace. On Dartmoor and in the
110 RECREATIONS UF A NALUNALIDSL

New Forest Blackgame may still be met with,
but a mere remnant of the ancient stock which has
now but a precarious existence. In Wolmer
Forest, although it became extinct in Gilbert
White’s day, it was re-introduced after the planting
of the wood by Sir Charles Taylor, then ranger of
the forest, and for some time throve exceedingly
well. The parent stock of the present race came
from Cumberland, and in 1872 an old man who had
brought the birds to Wolmer was still living in the
neighbouring village of Liphook. Had they been
properly looked after, and the due proportion of the
sexes maintained—one Blackcock to three Grey-
hens—they would have increased and done well
there, for the country is well suited to their habits ;
but in the belief that they had better be left alone,
the cock birds were suffered to become much too
numerous in proportion to the hens, with the result
that the latter were so worried in the pairing time
as to be unable to nest in peace, and thus the
number of broods hatched annually declined, until
at length they once more reached that verge of
extinction from which they had been but lately
rescued.

Blackgame, like Capercaillie, seldom stay long
or thrive in places where they have been intro-
duced unless the introduction means a restoration
to ancient haunts. Experiments have been tried
on the heath lands in Norfolk, on the Welsh hill-
sides in Carnarvonshire, and in several parts of
Ireland, but with only partial success, and that not
maintained. Either the ground was not quite
Seas aoeivetades ae DBLACKGAME. crt

suited to them, or they did not find the sort of food
they like—cotton grass, heather shoots, buds of the
bog myrtle, seeds of the rush (only to be found on
low-lying boggy ground), catkins of the alder,
berries of the rowan tree and juniper, leaves of
polypodium, oats, and acorns. Where all or most
of these are to be found Blackgame ought to do
well, if there are also birch, larch, and fir plantations
at hand. But foxes have to be reckoned with, and
in parts of the country where they are more or less
preserved for hunting they sadly interfere with the
rearing of Blackgame. From other causes these
fine birds have of late years become scarce even in
Scotland, where in some districts they were once
fairly plentiful. Sportsmen are apt to forget that
Blackcocks are polygamous, and that there should
always be at least three times as many hens as
there are cocks. They shoot too many of the
former, which, being much less wary, and keeping
with their broods in the early part of the season,
are more readily approached and afford easy shots
at close quarters. Another cause of decrease is the
number of barren hens that may be seen every year.
From close observation of them in the breeding
season Mr Millais is inclined to think that the
period of fertility of the Greyhen is much shorter
than with other game birds, lasting only two or three
years, so that should indiscriminate shooting be
carried on, only a small percentage of breeding
birds are left to perpetuate their kind. One other
cause of decrease remains to be considered, namely,
that arising from the introduction of Pheasants into
112 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

coverts where Blackgame have previously held
undisputed sway. This is sometimes done with the
intention of adding variety to the game bag, and
where there are suitable coverts the idea at first
seems natural and feasible; but experience has
shown that in proportion as the Pheasants increase
in the woods the Blackgame gradually disappear.
It is wiser to do without the foreign fowl, or shoot
him elsewhere, and concentrate one’s attention on
developing the stock of native game birds in the
shape of Red and Blackgame, Capercaillie, and
Woodcock, which, together with Snipe, Golden
Plover, and wildfowl in their proper seasons, will
help to make as varied a bag at the end of the day
as the keenest sportsman could desire.
THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE RED-
LEGGED PARTRIDGE

Tue Red-legged Partridge, like the Pheasant, is
not indigenous to this country. Both have been
introduced, though one of them existed here many
centuries before the other. Of the Pheasant
(Phastanus colchicus) we are only able to say that
we are indebted for it to the Romans, but the exact
date of its introduction is unknown. Of the Red-
legged Partridge we are enabled to speak with
greater precision; for, thanks to the records of
some of the older writers on British ornithology,
we can point to a period when it was unknown
here, and can even fix approximately the date of its
introduction. Further than this, it may be de-
monstrated that the birds which are now scattered
over various parts of England, chiefly in the east
and south-east, are not the descendants of one
ancient original stock, but have become dispersed
from several different centres of introduction.
Four or five such centres at least may be indicated,
and will be presently mentioned; but it will be
convenient, in the first place, to refer very briefly to
the period when the Red-legged Partridge was
quite unknown here.

Sir Thomas Browne, in his account of Norfolk

H TLS
114. RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

birds, written about 1667, says: “ Though there be
here very great store of Partridges, yet the French
Red-legged Partridge is not to be met with.” This
observation was probably suggested by some letter
of his contemporary Willughby, with whom he
corresponded, and who speaks of him as ‘‘my
honoured friend Sir Thomas Browne of Norwich,
a person deservedly famous for his skill in all
parts of learning, but especially in natural history.”
Willughby’s own views about this bird are ex-
pressed in his Oruzthologta, which his friend John
Ray translated and printed a few years after his
death, viz., in 1678. He says (p. 23): “‘ We have
been informed that the Red-legged Partridge
(Perdix rufa) is found in the isles of Jersey and
Guernsey”; and further on (p. 167): ‘‘ This kind
is a stranger to England; howbeit, they say it
is found in the isles of Jersey and Guernsey,
which are subject to our king.”

From these statements it may be taken for
granted that, if Willughby and his friend Sir
Thomas Browne (the leading naturalists of their
day in correspondence with men of similar tastes in
other parts of the country) were unaware of the
existence here of the Red-legged Partridge, it
could not have been introduced at that date. On
the other hand, there is reason to believe that
within a very few years later an experiment was
made to establish the species in England, for Daniel,
in his Rural Sports (vol. iii., p. 94), says: “ So far
back as the time of Charles II. (1660-1685) several
pairs of these Red-legged Partridges were turned
THE RED-LEGGED PARTRIDGE 115

out about Windsor to obtain a stock ; but they are
supposed to have mostly perished, although some of
them, or their descendants, were seen for a few years
afterwards.” Unfortunately, Daniel has omitted
to give his authority for this statement, which is
the more to be regretted since it relates to what is
believed to be the first attempted introduction of the

 

THE RED-LEGGED PARTRIDGE.

“‘red-leg”’ in this country—an experiment, in fact,
which preceded those of which we have more
certain information by about a century! In or
about the year 1770 several noble sportsmen appear
to have combined in importing eggs from France,
and hatching them out under hens on their estates
in different parts of the country. In East Suffolk
the Marquis of Hertford and Lord Rendlesham
turned out a good many at Sudbourn and
116 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Rendlesham. In Northumberland, at Alnwick,
their example was followed by the Duke of
Northumberland. In Essex the Earl of Rochford
tried a similar experiment at St Osyth, and in
1777 coveys were met with at Colchester, which, no
doubt, had emanated from this last-named centre,
In 1776 Sir Harry Fetherstonhaugh, at Uppark,
Sussex, imported a lot of eggs from France; and
from a correspondence with his mother, which has.
been preserved, it appears that several coveys were
reared within the walled gardens of Harting Place
and in the Park; and, although the experiment to
establish them here permanently seems to have
failed, there can be little doubt that from this.
new centre of introduction the county of Sussex was.
originally stocked. It issomewhat curious that from
about 1820 until 1860 not a single ‘“red-leg” was
observed in this parish ; but in the latter year several
eggs of this species were found on a farm on the
downs, and since that date a covey or two has been
found every year, at first on the downs amongst the
furze, heath, and juniper, and gradually they have
found their way down into the valleys where, within
the last few years, they have increased to amarkedex-
tent, though not to the prejudice of the English birds.
In 1823 a fresh centre of dispersal originated in West
Suffolk, at Culford, near Bury St Edmunds, where
Lords Alvanley and De Ros turned out a number
of ‘“red-legs.” Those previously introduced in the
eastern division of that county increased rapidly,
and spread from Aldeburgh to Woodbridge, and
into Norfolk, where it is most probable that other
THE RED-LEGGED PARTRIDGE 117

landowners, following the example thus set them,
gave fresh broods their liberty, and so helped to
stock the county.

If now we endeavour to trace the lines of
dispersal from these various centres, it will be seen
that there was at first no tendency on the part of
the birds to move in any one direction ; for example,
southwards, as many species move in autumn.
They apparently dispersed in alldirections. Those
reared at Alnwick, it would seem, could not have
increased to any great extent, for we find no record
of their appearance in either of the adjoining
counties of Durham or Cumberland, though twenty
years ago they were reported as breeding in
Westmorland, where it is possible they may have
found their way from the Northumberland border.

Some of the Norfolk birds wandering northward
to the shores of the Wash boldly crossed over into
South Lincolnshire, where they are now fairly
established, and have gradually found their way into
the northern division of that county. Mr Cordeaux,
of Great Cotes, near Ulceby, writing in 1874
(Zoologist, 1874, p. 4224), says of the Red-legged
Partridge: ‘‘ This bird is becoming quite common in
that part of South Lincolnshire bordering the Wash
and opposite the county of Norfolk. I am told it
has of late years gradually extended its range in
that district.” In his Bzrds of the Humber District,
the same writer says (p. 81): ‘The Red-legged
Partridge is fortunately only an occasional wanderer
into North Lincolnshire. I have seen birds that
were shot in the neighbourhood of Ashby, near the
118 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

river Trent.” Three years later, namely in October
1875, he was able to record the fact of two having
been shot in his own neighbourhood, near Ulceby.
Nor have the peregrinations of these birds north-
ward been impeded by the Humber, which,
notwithstanding its width, they must have crossed
on their way into Yorkshire if (as stated by Messrs
Clarke and Roebuck in their excellent Handbook of
Yorkshire Vertebrata) there is no evidence to show
that this species was ever introduced into that county.
They observe that it is now “resident in various
parts of Yorkshire, but in extremely limited
numbers, and only very occasionally shot.” If
then it is not an introduced species in Yorkshire,
but has found its way there naturally or accidentally,
it seems more reasonable to assume that it has got
there from Lincolnshire (in continuation of the pro-
gress from Norfolk) rather than from Northumber-
land through Durham, in which last-named county
there seems to be no record of itsappearance. Atthe
same time it is quite possible that the few noted by
Mr A. G. More (/dzs, 1865, p. 428) as ‘ breeding
very rarely in West Yorkshire,” may have crossed
the western border of that county from Westmor-
land, and so perhaps may be descendants of the
Northumbrian stock originally introduced at
Alnwick.

From Lincolnshire, also, it seems probable that
the Red-legged Partridge has found its way into the
adjoining county of Nottingham, where, we are
assured on good authority, it appears to be increas-

ing.
THE RED-LEGGED PARTRIDGE to

Mr A. G. More states (Z¢.) that attempts to
establish it in Derbyshire have failed, but we learn
from Garner’s Natural History of Staffordshire (p.
270) that it has been introduced at Teddesley in
that county, though the author considers it ‘‘no
desideratum for the sportsman.”

In Lancashire the Red-legged Partridge was
turned down at Rufford in some numbers by the
late Sir Thomas Hesketh about 1862, and by the
present baronet in 1879, but all have disappeared.

Messrs Coward and Oldham, in their Bzras of
Cheshire (p. 190), state that, although occasionally
reared from introduced eggs, this bird has never
succeeded in establishing itself in Cheshire. In
Shropshire it appears to be almost as rare. A few
have been shot at Churchstoke, near the Braidden,
and at Weston Park and Willey, where the eggs
were introduced, some were hatched in the nests
of the Common Partridge.

In Cambridge, Huntingdon, Northampton, and
Rutland, it is reported to be found, breeding
occasionally ; and as we proceed southward we find
it in Berkshire, where (as already mentioned) it is
said to have been introduced at Windsor in Charles
the Second’s time, in Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire
(where it is now resident and becoming common),
and in Hertfordshire, where the present stock may
perhaps be descended from those originally turned
out by the Earl of Rochford in the adjoining county
of Essex.

In the metropolitan county, where the farms are
nearly all grass, and therefore not at all suited to
120 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the requirements of this bird, it is nevertheless met
with as a straggler from Hertfordshire and Essex.
I have notes of its occurrence about Stanmore,
Elstree, and Brockley Hill; and in September 1880,
when shooting at Northaw, near Barnet, I picked
up the remains of a “red-leg,” which had evidently
been killed and partly eaten by a Peregrine Falcon.

Some fifteen years ago the Red-legged Partridge
was reported to be breeding occasionally in Kent,
and probably it is now as well known there as it is
in Sussex, to which county I have already referred.
The author of the well-known Oruzthological
Rambles in Sussex (p. 169) states that :—

“In July 1841 two coveys of ‘red-legs’ were
hatched under hens, and turned down on a manor
in the parish of Kirdford, in the Weald of Sussex.
They were observed there for nearly a fortnight,
when they suddenly disappeared. During the
following September a small covey was sprung
near Bolney, about twenty miles further west, and a
brace shot, probably a remnant of the Kirdford
birds.”

Here then we have another centre of dispersal
in Sussex, besides that at Uppark already men-
tioned ; and now it would seem that in this county
the bird is universally distributed, for I have shot
“‘red-legs ” at such widely distant localities as Three
Bridges, Frant, Uckfield, Hellingly, Hassocks
Gate, West Grinstead, Midhurst, Harting, and
Chichester.

In Hampshire, where it was unknown in the
days of Gilbert White, who makes no mention of it
THE RED-LEGGED PARTRIDGE 121

in his Vatural History of Selborne, | have met with
it about Petersfield and Butser Hill, as well as at
Liss, which lies only four miles south from Selborne ;
and the late Mr Bell, in his edition of White’s
works (vol. ii., p. 365), refers to it as having been
met with at Holybourne, about the same distance to
the north of White’s village. I have heard of it
also at Alresford, and at Thruxton, near Andover, in
which direction it seems to have worked its way to
the Wiltshire downs. Writing from Calne, which
is almost in the centre of the last-named county,
the Rev. A.C. Smith says : —

“Tt is our good fortune in Wiltshire to know
but little of this bird.’ A few stragglers from time
to time have made their way into the county, and
have been shot at Winterslow, Draycot Park, and
Winterbourne Monkton.”

To these localities may be added (on the
authority of Mr Im Thurn’s list of the Bzrds around
Marlborough) Nest Woods, Marlborough, Og-
bourne, Maizey, and Rabley Copse. Doubtless it
has been met with by sportsmen in many other
parts of the county.

In Dorsetshire the Red-legged Partridge would
seem to be by no means common, and Mr A. G.
More states (/dzs, 1865, p. 428) that attempts to
establish it in this county have failed. Pulteney, in
his Azstory of Dorsetshire, notices one that was
shot at Upwey, near Weymouth; but Mr Mansell
Pleydell, in his Bzrds of Dorset, states that it has
failed to attain a permanent footing in the county.

1 Because of its supposed enmity to the Common Partridge.
122 RECREATIONS OF A NATUKALISL

This is somewhat strange since parts of the county
are well suited to its habits.

Proceeding westward, it may be mentioned ex
passant that the Red- legged Partridge has found its.
way to the Isle of Wight, where it has been shot at
least on two occasions —once near Newchurch, and
again near Freshwater. On both occasions only
single birds were met with, probably stragglers from
the mainland.

In Devonshire it is almost unknown. It does
not appear in Dr Moore’s List of Devonshire Birds.
(Trans. Plym. Instit. 1830), nor in Bellamy’s.
Natural Fitstory of South Devon, published in 1837.
In Rowe’s catalogue of the birds of that county,
however, it is stated that “a few specimens have
been procured,” though no localities are specified.
One is recorded to have been shot many years ago
on Waddle’s Down, near Whitstone, Newton St
Cyres; and Messrs D’Urban and Mathew in
their Birds of Devonshire have noted a few more
instances of its occurrence in the county.

According to the late Mr Rodd, the Red- legged
Partridge is unknown in Cornwall (Birds of
Cornwall, p. 77); but in the Appendix, which I
furnished to his book, I pointed out (p. 310) that
in the Monthly Magazine for December 1808 the
author of a list of Devon and Cornish vertebrates
(believed to be a Mr James, of Manaccan), remarks:
‘«] have been told that Charles Rashleigh, Esq., of
St Austell, procured from abroad some of the
red-legged birds and turned them loose, and ¢hat they
have multipled,” a statement repeated in the same
THE RED-LEGGED PARTRIDGE 123

words by Polwhele in his History of Cornwall. It
would seem that either a very few were turned out,
which soon got dispersed and killed, or else that
unfavourable circumstances prevented their increas-
ing, and they gradually died off. Otherwise one
would have expected that from this fresh centre of
dispersal at St Austell, both Cornwall and Devon
might have been stocked, and perhaps some
stragglers might even have found their way into
Somersetshire.

When Mr Cecil Smith, in 1869, published his
Birds of Somersetshive, he was unable to include the
Red-legged Partridge in his list. Since that date,
however, stragglers have occasionally been met with
in that county. -In September 1879, Mr C. Fry
Edwards, of The Grove, Wrington, shot a brace on
the manor of Compton Bishop, where the keeper
informed him that others fed in the coverts with
the Pheasants. It does not appear that any had
been turned out in the neighbourhood, and these
birds, therefore, must have wandered a considerable
distance. I subsequently received from Mr Cecil
Smith the following note on the occurrence of this
bird in Somersetshire :-—

‘“‘On December 14, 1882, I saw at one of the
poulterer’s shops in Taunton a Red-legged Partridge,
which had been shot that morning at Kingston,
about three miles off, where another was seen at the
same time, but not obtained. I was also informed
that a small covey of four or five had been seen at
Nynehead, near Wellington, but I do not know
that any of them were shot. The occurrence of
124 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

these Red-legged Partridges near Taunton is worthy
of notice, since, in all probability, they wandered
there from some distance ; for I have not heard of
any being reared or turned out in this neighbour-
hood; nor are they so numerous in the neighbour-
ing counties of Dorset or Wilts as to make it likely
that they came from either of those counties. In
the east of Somerset, near the Mendips, I am in-
formed by Mr Compton (the author of an interesting
little book on the parish of Winscombe, which has
a chapter on the birds of that neighbourhood),
‘that the Red-legged Partridge was introduced at
Cheddar, about sixty-six years since, by Mr Cobley,
who was afterwards vicar of the parish. The birds
spread and drove the grey birds till they became so
strong that to preserve any of the old species it was
resolved to exterminate the foreigners. This was
done, and the grey birds were restored, but some of
the ‘‘red-legs” may have escaped. Mr Charles
Edwards shot some on the cross-side of our hill
about two years ago’ [as above stated]. In regard
to these Mr Compton says: ‘that Mr C. E. Smith,
of Maxe, thinks they must have come from some
other source, as he has shot over this manor and
district for many years, and had seen no ‘‘red-legs”
for forty years.’ Those seen or killed at Kingston
and Nynehead, therefore, are not likely to be
strangers from the Mendip side of the county, and
I have never heard of any having been turned out
in this neighbourhood. Indeed, the only ones I
ever heard of about here were some which my
father had hatched from some eggs he brought with
THE RED-LEGGED PARTRIDGE 125

him from Paris in 1835; but these were kept in an
aviary, and none escaped. So far as I remember,
also, they did not breed.”

It may have been from the Cheddar stock,
above referred to, that representatives of the
species found their way into the neighbouring
county of Gloucester, although it is probable that
Wiltshire also furnished originally some proportion
of the birds now to be met with there. In the
district lying between Cirencester and Cheltenham,
‘“‘red-legs” are regarded as scarce, and not on the
increase, the coveys being small and few in
number; while on the Worcestershire side of the
Cotswolds, in the Vale of Gloucester, it is said
there are none to be found.

The further we proceed westward the scarcer
do we find the Red-legged Partridge. In Here-
fordshire, for example, | am not aware that it has
been met with more than once. Mr Ernest
Armitage, writing from Dadnor, Ross, on October
7, 1881, says :—

‘*A friend of mine shot a Red-legged Partridge
in this neighbourhood last week, and I am anxious
to know whether this bird has been known to visit
Herefordshire before. I have lived here all my
life, and no one whom I have asked can remember
ever having heard of one being killed here before,
and I am sure no one has reared any. It was a
single bird, and was shot in a meadow near Ross.”

Still further westward, however, has the ‘‘red-
leg” wandered, namely, into Brecon, which is the
last county on my list.
126 RECREATIONS Ur a NALUNALISL

Mr E. Cambridge Phillips, in his Bzrds of
Brecon, says :—

‘About six or seven years ago a young bird of
this species was killed at Scethrog, near Brecon,
by Mr Williams, of Manest, in a turnip field.
About six months afterwards another was caught
in a garden at Brecon, and was kept alive for some
days. Mr Williams thinks that Mr Alfred
Crawshay, of Talybont, turned out a couple of
Red-legged Partridges about a year previously,
and that they must have hatched a small brood.
In the autumn following he believes there were
four or five young ones, and he surmises that the
bird he shot and also the bird caught in Brecon
were two of them; the remainder were not seen
afterwards. Mr Williams is an indefatigable
sportsman, and has shot over the greater part of
the county for the last thirty years, and these are
the only two he has ever seen or heard of as being
killed.”

Thus far, then, are we enabled to trace the
present distribution of the Red-legged Partridge in
this country. From the foregoing remarks it will
be seen that, although there has been of late years
a tendency with this bird to move westward—a
tendency which has been strengthened by the
introduction here and there of imported birds or
eggs—it is nevertheless still most plentiful (and
sportsmen who enjoy a “ Partridge drive” will add
“most appreciated”) in the eastern counties, where
it was first introduced.

It may be remarked incidentally that this bird,
Lon nov-unUuTns) PARTRIDGE 127

which is known to many people as ‘the Guernsey
Partridge,” is believed to be now extinct in
Guernsey, and a few only are said to exist still in
Jersey. Onthis point an interesting note by Mr
Cecil Smith will be found in the Zoologist for
1880, p. 397.

In Scotland the Red-legged Partridge has once
been met with. In January 1867 a solitary indi-
vidual of this species was found with a covey of
Common Partridges and shot within two miles of
Aberdeen. It was supposed to be an accidental
visitor from the south, no others having been seen
or heard of before or since in any part of Scotland.
Can it have been the last surviving descendant of
the old Northumbrian stock reared at Alnwick?

Messrs Baikie and Heddle, in their Westoria
Naturalis Orcadensts, printed in 1848, state that in
1840 the Red-legged Partridge was introduced
into Orkney with some of the common species by
the Earl of Orkney, but that they were unaware
what success had attended the experiment.

The Grey Partridge was introduced into
Orkney long before the red-legged species. Low,
in his Fauna Orcadensis, published in 1813, says :—

“Partridges were transported into this country
some years ago and placed in Walls by the then
proprietor, but I scarce think they have come to
anything. I once saw one of them, which was shot
by mistake in Hoy, which is about twelve miles
from the place where they were first placed, but
never heard of any other of the original colony
{though it consisted of several pairs), or of their

 
128 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

offspring. I suppose they had been all destroyed
by the ravenous birds, or wanted shelter to breed
in, as the nature of that bird is to hide amongst
corn, broom, whins, etc., none of the two last of
which it could have here.”

In Ireland the Red-legged Partridge is un-
known, except as an introduced species in the
county Galway.

The alleged enmity between Grey and Red-
legged Partridges is a fiction. (See Zhe Zoologist,
1889, p. 119, and Babington’s Birds of Suffolk,
p- 109.) So says Lord Walsingham, who calls it ‘‘a
popular error” in his volume on ‘‘ Shooting,” in the
Badminton Library (p. 144). The two species are
found together in the same fields, and will some-
times lay in each other’s nests. It is only in the
pairing time that the cock birds become pugnacious,
and drive away intruders.
CATCHING WOODPIGEONS

CONSIDERING the enormous flocks of Woodpigeons
which visit us in autumn, to the great annoyance of
farmers in many parts of the country, it is some-
what surprising that no systematic measures are
adopted to thin their numbers and utilise them as
food, especially as they are larger and of far finer
flavour than the ordinary dovecote pigeons.
Doubtless, a good many are shot by waiting and
watching for them as they come in to roost in the
plantations ; but not one tithe of them are killed
that might be procured in other ways, even when
decoys are put out to attract them.

The question, ‘‘ How to destroy Woodpigeons,”
is often asked by those who, from the tone of their
inquiries, evidently look upon them with no
friendly feeling ; nay, obviously regard them as an
unmitigated nuisance. In connection with covert
shooting, some very useful hints are given by the
authors of the Badminton volumes on ‘ Shooting”
on the subject of killing Woodpigeons, but these
are only in relation to shooting, and nothing is said
in regard to traps or nets.

In Zhe Field of December 8, 1883, will be
found an account by an eye-witness of the mode in
which these birds are netted in the Pyrenees.
Briefly stated, this is effected by suspending nets at

I 129
130 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

a good height between large trees in open spaces
which have been cleared for the purpose in the
woods.

At the height of about forty feet in each oak is
fixed a spar, from which depends a rope, with the
lower end pegged to the ground, and carrying a
wooden travelling ring weighted with iron. Each
spar has a block and halyards, the standing part of
the latter being fast to the wooden ring. The
nets, 13-inch mesh, and about fifty feet broad,
have their upper corners hooked on to two of the
wooden rings, and are thus hoisted into position ;
the lower ends are drawn backwards (z.e., south-
wards) for about thirty feet, and pegged down; the
two halyards of each net are hooked to a single
trigger, and all is then ready.

Beaters with white flags are posted in trees for
nearly a mile along the line of route in which the
Pigeons are expected to arrive, and acting in
concert at a given signal, wave their flags and
shout, driving the birds down towards the nets,
which are then pulled over by the chief operator.
This, briefly described, is the plan pursued in the
Pyrenees.

In the immense woods of fir and oak in “ Les
Landes,” stretching for miles between Bordeaux
and Bayonne, a very different though equally
effective method is employed. As this may be
new to many readers, I will endeavour to give
some account of it, based upon a description
furnished by an _ eye-witness, M. Louis
d’Ambaloges.
CATCHING WOODPIGEONS £31

The reader is to imagine himself in one of the
great woodland tracts above referred to, about
mid-autumn, when the Woodpigeons are coming
from the north on their migration southward. A
hut erected on rising ground faces the north, and
outside of it, just in front, the pigeon-catcher,
seated on a wooden stool, keeps watch for the
arrival of the flocks. Along the vistas which are
made on purpose through the surrounding firs and
other trees, his view commands the north, as well
as the sunrise and sunset, with a horizon sufficiently
extensive to admit of his seeing the pigeons on
the wing a couple of miles off. To be successful,
a pigeon-catcher must have the eye of a hawk to
detect the birds before they are over the hut. He
must be quick and active enough to get inside in
time, and find ready to hand the various cords that
work the decoys, the sight of which causes the
Wild Pigeons to stop, for they arrive on the scene
with astonishing rapidity, pass on like a flash of
lightning, and are seen no more, unless they are
stopped at once.

The decoys, of which there are usually ten or a
dozen, are live pigeons fixed at various distances on
the trees around the selected spot, and tethered by
light straps round the legs to a movable perch,
which is set in motion by means of a line running
to the hut. This causes them, when the cord is
pulled, to open and close their wings with all the
appearance and noise of a Pigeon about to perch,
thus attracting the attention of the wild birds as they
approach, and causing them to stop and alight.
132 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

The lines from all the decoys radiate towards the
hut, where the pigeon-catcher sits, like a spider in
his web, to work them one by one, or several at a
time, as he may think fit. In short, the first stage
of the business is then accomplished.

Let us suppose that the pigeon-catcher has just
seen a flock of Pigeons coming, and has got back to
his hut without being seen by them. He at once
sets the decoys in motion, and the wild birds, de-
scending to the lure, cover the’ trees around him.
The next thing to be done is to make them descend
to the ground at a spot prepared for them, where
they can be covered bya net. To this end there is
in the hut, tethered by the legs to a cross perch
with a long handle, another decoy Pigeon, called /
Semée. The part it plays is to be lifted up and
down by the experienced hand of the pigeon-
catcher, which results in the production of a sound
like that made by a Pigeon when fluttering to the
ground, and suggests to the new arrivals that they
may descend without fear.

In order to keep them as quiet as possible (for
good decoys should not move unless made to do so),
all these tame birds are blindfolded, as hawks used
to be formerly by a process called “seeling,” which
consists in tying up the eyelids with thread. Nor
is this all. In a corner of the hut is a little palisade
made of fir sticks fixed in the ground, which incloses
several tame Pigeons called Poudets, since their office
is to call the wild birds as a hen does her chickens.
These, more fortunate than the other decoys, are
neither blindfolded nor are their movements fettered.
CATCHING WOODPIGEONS 133

They can walk about much as they like, but without
being able to fly, for their wings are tied. Their
inclosure, which is open at the top, has an aperture
communicating with the ground outside by means
of a little sliding bar, which is movable at pleasure
by the pigeon-catcher.

When a lot of Woodpigeons have been lured
down into the trees around, the so-called Poudets are
let out through this opening one by one, as many
as may be thought necessary. They go through a
narrow passage which they are obliged to follow,
one after another, at the end of which they come to
the prepared ground, which has a turf bank all
round it, high enough to prevent their getting out.
Here, on little tufts of grass and herbage, purposely
arranged, is scattered grain, wheat, or rye, which
the Poulets pick up, running about here and there
like Pigeons at liberty, and thus tempting the new
arrivals, now looking at them from the tops of the
trees, to come down and feed with them.

Through a hole in the hut a full view is obtained
of the ground, only a few yards off. It isan oblong
square about five yards by three yards, and is
levelled and cleared of all superfluous undergrowth,
with the exception of a few tufts here and there as
above mentioned. The net when set is folded back
to right and left on either side of the ground above
the top of the tuft bank. When at length, by means
of the decoys, the Semée, the Pouwlets, and a certain
amount of “cooing” which the pigeon-catcher
imitates to perfection, a number of Woodpigeons
are induced first to alight on the trees and then to
134 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

descend to the ground; the man noiselessly seizes
with both hands the strong wire with its wooden
handle, which works the net, and, with a strong pull,
draws it quickly towards him. Like lightning the
net is unfolded, and the two wings of it, springing
towards each other, completely cover the space
within the turf banks, and envelop both the decoys
and their wild dupes.

There are always a certain number of lookers-on
in the hut, armed with guns, and the shooters,
on perceiving the arrival of a lot of Pigeons, take
deliberate aim at those nearest to them on the trees,
and, waiting for a signal from the Pigeon-catcher,
who first makes sure that everyone is ready, fire the
instant the net is pulled. The guns go off as with
one report, the net envelops a struggling, fluttering
mass of birds, and everybody rushes out to secure
the prisoners and pick up the slain.

By the beginning of November the migration of
Pigeons is over; the autumn sport is at an end.
But the birds reappear in February on their return
northward, and the winter campaign begins and
continues until the end of March; with this altera-
tion, however, that the hut is made to face the south,
for the fowler must keep a look-out in the direction
in which the birds are expected to arrive.

In this, the extreme south-west part of France,
for some years past, Pigeon-catching has increased
to such an extent that, notwithstanding the fecundity
of these unfortunate birds, their numbers are ob-
served to be diminishing sensibly from year to year.
The flocks now seen are much smaller, usually
CATCHING WOODPIGEONS 135

numbering not more than five-and-twenty or thirty
individuals, and often consisting of only fifteen, ten,
or even half a dozen birds. Flocks of a hundred or
two are seldom seen, and hardly ever four or five
hundred as counted by the eyes of certain sportsmen
who always see double.

On one occasion, however, when the migration
was at its height, as many as 125 pigeons were
taken at one haul of the net, threatening to break
it by their struggling weight. But such a stroke of
luck as this does not often occur. La Chasse aux
Palombes, as the French call it, is nevertheless a
pretty lucrative business. It is not unusual, in an
autumn campaign, for a man to take from five to
six hundred couple of Pigeons, the average price of
which varies from 2 francs to 24 francs, a good profit
when the pigeon-catcher is working solely for his
own benefit, for the expenses amount to very little,
the materials costing less than roo francs, or £4,
and lasting for an indefinite period, while the rent
to the landowner for the use of the ground is
represented by the delivery of perhaps fifteen
couple of pigeons a year. Again, these pro-
fessional fowlers sometimes carry on their business
for the amusement of the neighbouring landowners
as far as Bordeaux, Bayonne, and Arcachon, when
it is nearly all profit, for besides their share of the
birds caught, they are paid for their time, and are
allowed their board, lodging, and travelling
expenses. So that they return to their families
with well-filled pockets.

Most of the huts erected for the large landed
136 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

proprietors, especially in the ‘‘Grande Lande,” are
fitted up so comfortably as to enable the owners to
spend the whole day there. They are divided into
several rooms, with chairs and couches, a good fire
burning, a table on which an excellent luncheon is
served, books, newspapers, cigars, and cards. Nor
is this all; the hut is often graced by the presence
of the ladies, who arrive as usual in elegant toilettes,
and some of whom are excellent pigeon shots, even
at birds on the wing. At some of these places only
the gun is used. This simplifies matters, for then
only a hut is required, with a covered way leading
to it, and seven or eight decoys placed on the trees
to attract the Pigeons. Thus, those who are fond
of shooting can enjoy themselves to their heart’s
content. :

The Pigeons killed in autumn are the best, those
obtained on the return journey in February and
March being far inferior in condition ; for they have
got older, grown thinner, and have acquired an
unpleasant taste, which is peculiar to all birds killed
at the beginning of the nesting season. Not only
is it a mistake on this account to kill them at this
time of year, but, by destroying such numbers
as they do when the birds are on the point of re-
turning to their breeding haunts, they are thought-
lessly ‘killing the Goose with the golden eggs.”
Their capture in autumn is a very different
matter.

If it is only for want of knowing how to set
about it that no systematic capture of Woodpigeons
is practised in this country, the method above
CATCHING WOODPIGEONS 137

mentioned, like the different plan described in The
field of December 8, 1883, may be tried with
advantage by those who, living in parts of the
country where these birds are numerous in
autumn and winter, may take good toll of the
passing flocks.

Large numbers arrive here from the Continent,
particularly in November. The home-bred birds,
which begin nesting early in April, and rear
several successive broods before September, quit
their summer quarters about the end of the latter
month, and go southward, always flying head to
wind. Mr Abel Chapman, in his Brrad-lfe on the
Borders, gives a good account of the Woodpigeons
from personal observation of their habits in the
north of England. At some seasons, he says, and
under certain conditions of weather, large flocks
of these birds cross the North Sea, especially in
November; but as no great number are bred in
Norway, Sweden, or Denmark, it is probable that
many of the visitors to England come from Scot-
land, merely shifting their quarters in search of

food.
THE HORSE AND ITS HISTORIANS

Ir we consider its antiquity as a domesticated
animal, and its great utility to man—greater, per-
haps, than that of any other species—it is not
surprising that the horse should have furnished a
theme for writers in all ages and in every civilised
country. The works which have been written on
its natural history, anatomy, and physiology; its
dentition, diseases, and cures; its use and treat-
ment in relation to agriculture, cavalry, hunting,
and racing; with treatises innumerable on equita-
tion, breaking, training, and stable management ;
bits and bridles, saddles, and harness of every
description—would form a library of no mean pro-
portions. And should anyone feel disposed to
collect all the works which have been written
relating to the horse, he would have to provide
shelf room for at least 4000 volumes.

I have been at the pains to count the titles
quoted in the most recent bibliography on the
subject,’ and find that, exclusive of editions and
translations, there have appeared, since the days of
Xenophon (s.c. 380) down to the issue of the
volumes on Hunting and Racing in the ‘“ Bad-

1 Works on Horses and Equitation: a Bibliographical Record
of Hippology. By F. H. Huth. Sm. 4to, pp. 440. London:
Quaritch, 1888.

138
THE HORSE AND ITS HISTORIANS 139

minton Library” (a.p. 1886), no less than 3800
works in eighteen different languages. I have
been at the further trouble to apportion the titles of
all these works (which in the bibliography referred
to are quoted chronologically) amongst the nations
which have produced them, with a view to ascertain
as nearly as may be in what proportions each has
contributed to the literature of the subject. The
result is rather curious. The earliest works are in
Greek, beginning with that by Kimon of Athens
(B.c. 430) on the Veterinary Art, and including the
well-known (and for the time they were written,
really excellent) treatises by Xenophon (B.c. 380)
on Horsemanship and on the duties of a Com-
mander of cavalry (first printed at Florence in folio
in 1516) besides the veterinary work of Hippo-
crates, the remarks on the horse in Aristotle’s
General FTistory of Animals, and the little-known
treatises of such writers as Sextus Julius Africanus
(a.D. 225), and Ammianus Marcellinus (a.D. 360),
many of them only fragments, and first made known
through Latin translations. No modern Greek
author appears to have written on the horse, and
amongst the ancients we find but seven names of
Greeks who have contributed to the literature of
this subject. Works in Latin, though rather more
numerous—and some of them, like those by Pliny
and Aldrovandus, better known—do not exceed
twenty-six, of which twenty-three were printed
before 1784, and three only—in the shape of theses
by candidates for degrees at German universities—
during the present century.
140 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Most people, without reflecting, might be dis-
posed to assert, and to back their opinion, that
more books on the horse have been written in
English than in any other language; but, assuming
Captain Huth’s Bzbliography to be tolerably com-
plete, the careful analysis which I have made by
reference to it shows that this impression is
erroneous. English writers on hippology are,
doubtless, numerous enough; but they do not
stand at the head of the list. Up to the year 1886
they may be credited with 950 works, of which 185
were printed before 180c; 120 more before 1825 ;
another 180 before 1850; and since that date no
less than 464. If to these we add the 34
English books printed in America since 1850, and
1 in Australia in 1864, we have a total not far
short of to00. Of these it may be safely asserted
that a large proportion at the present day would
be difficult to meet with, and if found would prove
of not much value. The names of those who have
written for all time would not make a very long
list, although it should be observed that many
works of perhaps little intrinsic merit are sometimes
of value as illustrating the growth of knowledge on
the subject of which they treat.

The earliest English works relating to the horse
are concerned chiefly with hunting, and cannot be
said to refer so much to the horse individually, or
his management, as to the wild animals which he
enables his owner to chase. It is only because
they relate to hunting that they have any claim
to be included in a bibliography of hippology.
THE HORSE AND ITS HISTORIANS tar

Amongst such works may be mentioned 7he Art of
Flunting, by William Twici, written, originally in
Norman French, about the year 1307, by the hunts-
man to King Edward II.; the treatise on hunting
in the Boke of St Albans, 1486; and Turbervile’s
Booke of Hunting, 1575, a second edition of which
appeared in 1611.

Amongst the earliest books on equitation by
English writers we find Blundevile’s foure
chiefyst offices belonging to Horsemanship, 1565;
Astley’s Art of Riding, 1584; Clifford’s School
of Horsemanship, 1585; Gervase Markham’s
Discourse of Horsemanshippe, 1593; and his
Cavelarie, or the English Horseman, 1607, the
last-named writer being also the author of several
other works of a somewhat wider scope, such as
the treatise on horses in his Country Content-
ments, 1611; Markham’s Mazster Piece, 1615 ;
and his Fazthful Farrier, 1635, all of which
passed through several editions, and were very
popular in their day. De Grey’s Compleat
Horseman, 1639, many times reprinted, was
another popular book in its day. In Charles the
Second’s time (1683) there appeared rather a
notable work on the Axatomy of the Horse, by
Andrew Snape, farrier to his Majesty—sufficiently
esteemed to be translated into French, and to pass
through three or four editions. Nearly a century
later, 4n Anatomical Description of the Bones in
the Foot of the Horse, by James Clark, of
Edinburgh (1770), and the same author's Odserva-
tions on the Shoeing of Horses, attracted consider-
142 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

able attention, and were translated into German;
while, later still, the name of Bracy Clark became
well known through his numerous treatises on the
pathology and anatomy of the horse, his first essay,
On the Bots in Horses, appearing in 1796 in the
third volume of the Lznnean Society's Trans-
actions.

The earliest treatise on horse-breeding by an
Englishman, though it was written in Latin, is the
work of Richard Sadler, published in 1587. The
first English book on racing is one by Gervase
Markham, entitled How to Choose, Ride, Traine,
and Dyet both Hunting and Running Horses. It
at first formed part of his Descourse of Horseman-
shippe, 1593, but in 1596 was separately printed
under the title just quoted. Thesame writer is to be
credited with the first English work on ‘‘ Cavalry,”
of which the title has been already given. In
regard to the natural history and external form of
the horse, we have perhaps the earliest English
specimen in Topsell’s Azstorie of Foure-footed
Beastes, 1607, although manifestly a compilation
from older authors of different nationality.

As already intimated, English books on the
horse number not far short of a thousand, of which
very nearly one-half has been printed since 1850;
while, even as we write, fresh works and new editions
are constantly appearing.

Our French neighbours are not far behind us ;
for I have been able to count 919 works by French
authors on the horse, of which 105 were printed
before 1800, 30 more in the next quarter of a
THE HORSE AND ITS HISTORIANS 143

century, 204 in the succeeding quarter, and since
1850 no less than 580; so that, although prior to
1800 there were nearly twice as many English as
French books on the horse, during the last five-
and-thirty years the latter have exceeded the former
by 116.

But in voluminous writing on this special subject,
the Germans have distanced all competitors. Less
active than our own countrymen before the
commencement of the present century, when they
had produced only 142 different works, they added
275 in the next quarter of a century, and 256 more
by 1850, since which date a further contribution of
579 has been issued, making in all, to 1886, no
fewer than 1252. In regard to the subject-matter
of these, we find more books relating to anatomy,
veterinary practice, and cavalry than exist in
England, but fewer relating to hunting, and, as
might be expected, to racing. Those dealing with
equitation are perhaps a trifle more numerous, but
on this subject, as well as on breaking, training,
and stable management, the authorship is pretty
equally divided.

The Dutch literature relating to horses is not
very extensive, and Captain Huth’s bibliography
does not enable us to count more than 30 works in
his language. Next to the French, who stand
third on the list after the Germans and English, the
greatest number of works have been written in
Italian and Spanish, the former numbering 167, the
latter 127. Not more than a dozen have been
found in Portuguese; and in the Scandinavian
144 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

languages the number dwindles down from 62
in Swedish and the same number in Danish to
9 only in Norwegian.

In Hungarian we find 3; in Polish, 8; in
Russian, 21; while the Eastern languages are
represented by Persian, 8; Arabic, 1; and Hin-
dustani, 1. In regard to these the numbers
are probably under-estimated; for we should
certainly expect to learn thatin Persian and Arabic
a good many treatises on horses, not easily accessible,
are well known to Oriental scholars.

These statistics are of interest, as showing not
only the importance attached to the history of the
horse in all ages, but the shares in which different
nations have contributed to the literature of the
subject in all its branches. What a_ splendid
monograph of the horse might now be prepared
from the materials which have been shown to exist !
THE ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT

To speculate upon the origin of our domestic animals
is to enter upon a very wide field of research. Such
an inquiry takes us to so many distant countries, and
introduces us to so many different nations, that it at
once inaugurates a study of geography, history,
ethnology, languages, and literature sufficient to
occupy the leisure hours of a lifetime. And after all
this research, perhaps, we are unable to arrive at any
satisfactory or certain conclusion. The fact is, that
the reclamation of domestic animals from some
original wild stock, whatever and wheresoever it
may have been, dates so far back in the history of
mankind that no written record of its origin can now
be found. Wecan only surmise and argue from a
few isolated facts collected from different nations at
various periods of the earth’s history.

The domestic cat, which we now know in such
a great variety of forms, has doubtless not always
been domesticated, but, like the dog, horse, and some
other animals, has at some remote period been
reclaimed by man’s agency from a feral state.

But whence have arisen the numerous and
remarkably different breeds which are now scattered
all over the world? Have they originated from one
wild prototype, whose descendants, by transportation

K 145
146 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

to different climates and forced existence under
altered conditions of life, have, in the course of

countless generations, become so modified as to

Fa

aS

IEA

re

HI
AN
‘

= a

 

WOODEN MUMMY CASE FOR A CAT.

(This and the next two blocks are reproduced from Champjicury’s “ The Cat,”
by permission of Messrs George Bell & Sons.)

assume the appearance which they now present?
Or are we to believe that more than one wild ancestor
has contributed to the formation of the various
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 147

existing breeds, the variations presented by the wild
types being still further increased by the hybridisa-
tion of their progeny? Their variability, their
universal commixture, the perfect fertility of the
produce of the most widely separated
varieties, are arguments in favour of
their being only one species. On the
other hand, the remarkable difference
between some of the varieties is the
argument chiefly relied on for the
plurality of stocks.

What was the appearance pre-
sented by some of the earliest known
forms of the domestic cat amongst
the ancients? If this question could
be properly answered, we should have
the best clue to its origin; but we
have no precise information on the
subject. We have it on the authority
of the late Mr Blyth (one of the best
informed zoologists of recent times)
that domestic cats are mentioned ina
Sanskrit MS. 2000 years old, and in
Egypt their antiquity is known to be
even greater, as shown by monumental
drawings, and the discovery of their
mummied bodies in very ancient tombs. Some of
these mummy cases are very curious, being either
of wood hollowed out in the shape of a seated figure
of a cat, or of plaited straw of different colours,
surmounted with a painted wooden head of a cat.
For the Egyptians not only took great care of their

 

A MUMMIED CAT.
148 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

cats while alive, but honoured them when dead,
going into mourning and shaving their eyebrows.
The reason for this has been variously explained.
According to Horapollo, the cat was worshipped in
the temple of Heliopolis, sacred to the Sun, because
the size of the pupil of the animal’s eye is regulated
by the height of the sun above the horizon. Thus
the cat’s eye was thought to symbolise the orb of
day.’ Plutarch, on the other hand, in his treatise
on Lsis and Osiris, states that the image of a she
cat was placed at the top of the Sistrum’ as an
emblem of the Moon; partly, perhaps, because she
moves about by night, but chiefly because her eyes
dilate and grow large at the full of the moon,
contracting again at the moon’s decline.

The Egyptian name for the cat was Chaou, or,
according to some Egyptologists, J/aou, the latter
name (like so many others in primitive languages)
being onomatopeeic, that is, imitative of the animal
cry. The familiar name of ‘‘ Puss,” apparently, has
also come to us from the Egyptian. In the British
Museum may be seen several figures of the cat-
headed goddess Pasi, under which name the moon
was worshipped by the Egyptians, Pash signifying

as Pere Huc relates that he met some native naturalists at
Pekin, who showed him how a cat might fulfil the purpose of a
timepiece. They pointed out, he says, that the pupil of its eye
contracted gradually at the approach of noon; that at noon it
was like a hair or a very thin line traced perpendicularly on the
eye; after mid-day it began again to dilate. The missionary then
examined all the cats in the place, and concluded therefrom that
it was past noon. They all presented the same appearance at the
same time.
2 Sistrum (Gr. cssorpov), a large rattle described by Plutarch as
used by the Egyptians in the rites of Isis.
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 149

the face of the moon. The word is compounded of
the consonants P, SH, and T. T is the Coptic
feminine article, which, being discarded, the name
is reduced to PSH. But the aspirate SH should
be the tenuis S, and then the word would be PS,
as in Hebrew, which may be pronounced as or

 

AN EGYPTIAN FOWLER'S CAT.
(From a Tomb at Thebes.)

Pus. It thus appears that our familiar name for
the cat can boast of a very high antiquity.

One of the most ancient representations of the
cat is to be found in the Necropolis of Thebes,
which contains the tomb of King Hana, of the
eleventh dynasty. A statue of this king represents
him as standing erect, with his favourite cat
Boubaki at his feet. It has been conjectured, from
150 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

a painting taken from a tomb at Thebes, and now
in the British Museum, that the cat was taught by
the ancient Egyptians to retrieve." The painting in
question depicts an Egyptian fowler gliding in a
flat-bottomed boat through a reed bed, and throw-
ing sticks at waterfowl (apparently with as much
skill as a native Australian throws the boomerang),
while a cat is represented as looking up at him
with a wild duck in her mouth, and another bird,
apparently a water-hen, under her fore feet. In
the absence of any explanatory text, it looks as if
the cat were retrieving the birds knocked down by
her master; but, on the other hand, it is more
likely that she was merely profiting by the oppor-
tunity to secure a meal for herself. Bearing in
mind the cat’s natural antipathy to water, it is
difficult to believe that she could be induced to act
the part of a water-spaniel, or retriever.

Neither the Cheeta nor the Caracal, both of
which are used in India, Persia, and Syria for
chasing and killing antelopes, hares, and the larger
game birds, have ever been taught to retrieve.
Having stalked and killed their prey, they
commence to eat it, and have to be recaptured by
their trainers, hooded, and led back to the bullock-
cart, on which they are brought to the field. I
have nowhere been able to find any description of
a trained cat; although, in an Arabic treatise on
hunting, written in the tenth century, and a few

1 Wilkinson’s Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians,
vol. iii., p. 42. Paintings of this kind belong to the eighteenth
and nineteenth dynasties—1660 to 1440 B.c.
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 151

years since translated into French, there is a
chapter on the Wild Cat, in which it is stated, with-
out mentioning any date, that the first man who
ever employed this animal for the chase was Benou
Khafadja, and that the habits of the Cat are
similar to those of the Cheeta. It is possible that
the Egyptians may have so employed it, but there
is no satisfactory evidence of the fact.

It does not appear that the Cat was known to
the early Hebrews, or to the Assyrians, or to the
Greeks as a domestic animal. The Greek vases in
the British Museum with cat-like animals are F. 207,
BP, t26, EB, 171, EB. 172. “The last is spotted and
led in a string, probably intended for a hunting
leopard. F. 207 shows a woman playing with a
cat anda bird. F. 126 shows a man with a cat and
a bird. E.171 shows a cat on astool. It hasa
long body, long tail and high legs, all characteristic
of the cheeta. FF. 126 is striped. This and F.
207 come as near to our domestic cat as could be ex-
pected. Professor Miall thinks a true domestic cat
is indicated as an inhabitant of Greek countries from
400 to 300 B.c. but there is still room for doubt.
The late Professor Rolleston* was at some pains
to show that the domestic mouse-killer of the
Greeks was not a Cat, but a Marten (M/artes foina),
the animal called yady by Aristotle,’ and repeatedly
referred to by Aristophanes*® and other Greek
writers as destroying mice, birds, and birds’ eggs.

1 Journ. Anat. and Phys., 1868, November.
2 Hist: Apt. Als. 3, S35. Visy BO, SF Villiy 2Fy2 5 1X55 Ry J, Ae
3 Pax., 1079, ed. Bothe.
152 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

The Romans, on the other hand, were early
acquainted with the Cat as a mouse-killer. In the
Campana tomb, Cervitri, which represents in its
bas-reliefs and frescoes the atrium of the old
Lucumon’s house, there is painted on the ground-
line an unmistakable Egyptian cat, with a mouse
in her mouth. The Rev. W. Houghton, who has
paid much attention to the natural history of the
ancients, is of opinion that the Tyrrhene trade
with Egypt must have introduced the sacred
animal into the house of the Roman noble. He
refers to a mosaic found at Pompeii, which
“pictures to the life a splendid Persian (?) tabby,
plotting against a duck hung up in the larder.”
Here is evidence, he says, that the early people,
the Etruscans—to whatever race they belonged, or
whatever language they spoke—were acquainted
with the mouse-killing cat. Of course the
Pompeian cat might be separated from the
Etruscan one by hundreds of years; nevertheless,
here we have evidence of the fact that the animal
was domesticated occasionally, at anyrate, by the
Romans at some time previous to the destruction
of Pompeii and Herculaneum by the eruption of
Mount Vesuvius in a.p. 79. Through the Romans,
probably, domestic cats were introduced into Gaul
and Britain, where such as made their escape, or were
lost, would return toa feral state in the woods, and,
pairing with the European Wild Cat, which was
formerly very common in England, would, in the
course of generations, lose its similarity to its
Egyptian ancestor, and gradually assume the
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 153

appearance of our own wild cat, which is now so
marked in the variety known as “tabby.”?

An argument in support of this view is to be
found in the fact that in India, where no wild
species of the cat resembles Fe/zs ca¢us in colour
and markings, the tabby variety of domestic cat is
unknown, and the household breeds in that country
resemble the native wild species—e.g., Felis chaus
and Fels ornata — with which imported tame
animals have undoubtedly crossed (Blyth, /ourn.,
Asiatic Soc. Bengal, xxv., p. 441). Similarly in
South Africa the wild Feds caffra has impressed
its character upon imported tame varieties; and
the domestic breeds in South America, accord-
ing to Azara, have been in the same way affected
by inter-breeding with certain wild species peculiar
to that country. From these several cases, to
adopt the words of Darwin, “we see that in
Europe, as in Africa and America, the common
cat, which lives a freer life than most other
domesticated animals, has crossed with various
wild species, and that in some cases the crossing
has been sufficiently frequent to affect the character
of the breed.”

As to the particular species of cat which was
domesticated by the ancient Egyptians, opinions
differ. Many naturalists favour the view that
Felis chaus, a widely distributed species extending
from N.E. Africa to India, was probably the

1 The origin of the word “tabby” is perhaps not generally
known. It is a corruption of the Turkish wad (O. Fr. ¢advs,
Span. ¢aé/), a particular kind of waved silk imported from
Bagdad, and so named after the locality where it was made.
154 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

ancestor of our domestic race, although no such
colouration is to be found in European cats, and so
far as external appearance goes, Fels caffra, ‘the
Caffer cat, is more like our “tabby,” though a
larger animal with longer legs.

Strange to say, the remains of Felis “caffra
(according to Professor Boyd Dawkins) have
been found in a fossil state in deposits of the
Pleistocene age in this country, namely, in Bleadon
Cave, Somersetshire, and elsewhere. A’great
French naturalist, however, De Blainville, who
made a critical examination of the mummied
bodies of several cats brought from; Egyptian
tombs, arrived at the conclusion that they repre-
sented three different species.1 Hence it cannot
be affirmed with certainty that any one of these
three has given rise to the domestic type of cat
with which we are now so familiar.

These reflections lead to a general consideration
of the relationship which exists between the domestic
cat and the different wild species of Fe/zs which are
distributed over the earth’s surface.

The Arabic writer on hunting, already mentioned
(by name Sid Mahomed El Mangali), gives”us the
view which was prevalent among the Arabs eight
hundred years ago concerning the origin of the
cat. They said that as the buzzard was made out
of the clay which remained over after the falcon
had been created, so the cat was made out of the
clay which was left after the creation of the tiger—
a truly quaint theory of evolution, no doubt, but one

1 Osteographie des Mammiféres, ‘ Felis,” pp. 65, 85, 89, 90, 175.
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 155

which shows us that, even so long ago as the tenth
century, the Arabs, without knowing anything of
comparative anatomy, had a very good notion of
the natural affinities of animals. Indeed, it may be
said now as then, that, so far as regards general
structure, the cat is a tiger ona small scale.

In considering this and other relationships, we
must note the position which the great cat family
(Felidae) occupies in the order Carnivora in relation
to other carnivores. The land carnivora (or Fissi-
pedia, as they are termed, to distinguish them from
the Pinnipedia or seals) may be conveniently
separated into three large groups or sections, the
AZluroidea (comprising the Felide, Hyznide,
Viverride, and a few other abberrant forms), the
Cynoidea (which includes all the different species of
dog-like animals), and the Arctoidea, comprehend-
ing the Ursidz, Mustelidz, and Procyonidz. This
is not a mere fancifularrangement. A careful study
and comparison of the anatorny of most of these
different forms (whenever opportunity has favoured
the examination of specimens) has resulted in the
publication of descriptions and figures, by means of
which we are able to trace the relationships here
indicated. It need scarcely be said that the cranial
characters, and especially the dentition (as indicating
the animal’s mode of life and the nature of its food)
have been regarded as most important in determining
its zoological position; and thus this grouping
(artificial or arbitrary as it may at first sight appear)
really indicates, in the case of each of these three
sections, the possession by its members of certain
156 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

characters in common, which link them as it were
together, and which, being well marked, are easily
recognisable.

The characters which serve at once to distinguish
the Felidz are the looseness of the skin (purposely
so designed), the flexibility and strength of the
spine, the small head, capable of being turned
rapidly in any direction in search of prey, and the
wonderful arrangement of levers exhibited in the
limbs, affording the greatest amount of strength
combined with elasticity.

In the skeleton of the Felidae there are two
points of importance which indicate their zoological
position, and are correlated with their natural
habits—namely, (1) the character of the skull, and
(2) the structure and arrangement of the bones of
the toes.

1. The skull is remarkable for the well-
developed bony ridges which serve for the attach-
ment of the great jaw muscles, the immense size of
which causes a corresponding increase in the
width of the zygomaticarches. As in all Carnivora,
the facza/ portion of the skull is short in relation to
the cvanzaZ portion, the reverse being the case, e.g.,
with the Herbivora. This is correlated with the
different mode of feeding in these two different
orders of mammals, the flesh-eating animals re-
quiring sharp cutting teeth, the herbivorous ones
flat grinders. Hence, in connection with this, we
find the form of the condyle, or bony projection of
the lower jaw, so modified in the Carnivora as to
admit of little or no /a¢erval movement as in the
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 157

Herbivora, but only an up and down chopping or
cutting motion, while the teeth, especially the
canines, are enormously developed. Again, the
almost globular form of the bulla tympani, and the
division of the cavity into two portions by a bony
partition, are also distinctive characters of the

Felidz.

2. The structure of the foot is peculiar, inasmuch

 

MECHANISM OF THE CAT’S CLAW.
(Twice Natural Size. From a Sketch by T. J. Parker.)

a., with the claw retracted; B., with the claw exserted; mtc., the metacarpal ;
pA. |, the first ; 2%. 2, the second ; fA. 3, the third phalanx; %., the bony ‘‘hood”;
c., the claw; Z, the elastic ligament ; ¢., the flexor tendon; a., a ligamentous loop,
through which the tendon passes.
as the cats (with the exception of the Cheeta) are
the only animals which possess the power of retract-
ing the claws. This is effected by means of a
peculiar modification and arrangement of the second
and third joints of the toes, the ¢4zrd being pulled
back by an elastic ligament upon the second, when
not forcibly extended by means of the strong flexor
muscles which run along the under surface of the

foot.
158: RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

From a general review of the existing species of
Felide, it appears that they may be conveniently
grouped into three well-defined genera—(1) The
typical genus Fels, which includes by far the
greatest number of species (thirty-four); (2) the
genus Lyncus, comprising the short, thick-set
animals, with large tufted ears and short thick tails
(six species); and (3) the genus Cynelurus, which
includes but a single aberrant form—the Cheeta—
a small-eared, long-legged, and long-tailed animal,
differing from all other cats in its dentition and in
having claws which are not retractile.*

As to the geographical distribution of the Felide,
representatives of the family are to be found in all
parts of the world, with the exception of Australia,
New Zealand, South-east Malayasia, the Polynesian
Islands, Madagascar, and the Antilles.

By far the largest number of species occur in
Asia, where at the present time at least five-and-
twenty different kinds are known toexist. The most
notable of these are the Lion, Tiger, Leopard, or
Panther, Snow Leopard, Clouded Tiger, four of
species Lynx, and the Cheeta or Hunting Leopard,
the remainder consisting of some sixteen or seven-
teen species of smaller cats,

In the south-east of Asia the Lion and Tiger
meet on common ground. The Lion, however, has
his stronghold in Africa, and is comparatively scarce
to the east and north of Guzerat. The Tiger, on
the other hand, is unfortunately but too numerous

1 The popular name for this animal is derived from the
Hindustani Cita.
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 159

in Asia, especially in India, where the number of
men and cattle annually carried off by these animals
is something enormous. During the year 1885, in
the central provinces alone 221 tigers were killed,
and 260 the previous year. Leopards also are very
destructive, though they kill smaller prey in the
shape of antelopes, goats, sheep, and dogs.

There appears to be still some difference of
opinion amongst Indian sportsmen whether the
Leopard and Panther are two distinct species, or
merely small and large varieties of the same animal.
The former view is expressed by Captain Baldwin
in his excellent book on the Large and Small Game
of Lengal, following the opinion of Hodgson, Sir
Walter Elliot, and others, while the contrary view
advocated by Blyth and Jerdon is maintained by
Colonel Kinloch in his beautifully illustrated volume
on Large Game Shooting in Thibet, the Himatayas,
and India. He says :—

‘‘T have seen many live specimens, both wild
and in confinement; I have inspected hundreds of
skins from various parts of India; and I have heard
or read most of the arguments in favour of and
against the theory that there is more than one
species ; and I have come to the conclusion that
there are not sufficient grounds for separating the
panthers or leopards into anything but varzetzes.
Even these varieties are not, in my opinion, suff-
ciently defined to be looked upon as permanent.”

The Ounce or Snow Leopard (eles uncza)—so
called from its living amongst the snow-clad ranges
160 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

of Kashmir, Thibet, and the Altai Mountains—is
one of the most beautiful of the cat tribe, and one
of the most difficult to procure. The well-nigh in-
accessible nature of its haunts, where it preys
chiefly on the wild sheep, protect it from the rifle of
eastern sportsmen, with whom it is always a much-
coveted prize; for it has a beautiful fur, soft and
thick, to protect it from the cold climate in which it
lives, while its pale colour, almost white, with
duller spots than those of the Leopard, favours its
concealment when stalking its prey or being itself
stalked by man.

Captain Baldwin, in the work already referred to,
has a most interesting chapter on this animal, in
which he narrates the efforts he made, when in
Thibet, to bring up a Snow Leopard cub which had
been caught alive, and which he was anxious to rear
for transport to our Zoological Gardens. It fella
victim, he believed, to poison at the hands of a
native servant, who found it gave too much trouble
to look after. He also relates very graphically
how a fine old Snow Leopard, believed to be the
mother of the cub in question, was killed by one of
a party of Thibetans in a curious and unexpected
way. It was seen ata little distance, basking on a
ledge of rock at the mouth of its den, and appar-
ently asleep, when the native, looking over upon
it from above, dropped a large stone with such pre-
cision that it struck the sleeping animal in the
middle of the back and broke its spine. Captain
Baldwin, who only heard of the occurrence some
days afterwards, purchased the skin, which un-
fortunately had been very unskilfully preserved.
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 161

Amongst other notable cats of Asia, two especi-
ally deserve mention, on account of the curious
way in which they have been made useful to man ;
these are the Cheeta, or Hunting Leopard, and the
Caracal, or Desert Lynx. Both these animals are
trained in India, Persia, and Arabia to catch game
for their owners —the Cheeta taking deer and
antelopes, the Caracal taking partridges, francolin,
and other winged game. The practice of taming
and training these animals in the East is of very
ancient date. The Cheeta is figured on Assyrian
bas-reliefs in the act of seizing an antelope, and is
represented also on Egyptian monuments dating
about 1700 B.c., amongst the animals brought in by
way of tribute to the kings of Thebes by the black
tribes of the Upper Nile, led in a slip with a very
ornamental collar. The Arabian writer on hunting
of the tenth century, to whom I have already
referred, devotes several pages to the subject, point-
ing out the qualities and peculiarities of a good
leopard, and giving instructions for taming and
training him, deprivation of food and sleep being
the chief means employed. The Crusaders found
this kind of sport much in vogue with the Mussul-
man princes of Syria, and the Emperor Frederick
II., who made a journey to Jerusalem in 1228,
mentions, in his treatise De Arte Venandi, both
the Cheeta and the Lynx amongst the animals used
for hunting. In the fourteenth century the sport
was introduced into Europe, first in Italy, and
afterwards, in France, where it was patronised by
the French Court until the days of Henry IV.

L
162 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

The last trained Leopards seen in France were those
brought by Marie de Medicis from Florence in
1601. After that date they were no longer to be
seen, either in France or Italy, although in Ger-
many the sport was revived by Leopold I., who
died in 1705.1

Next to Asia, the greatest variety of cat-life
exists in Africa and South America, in each of
which continents some nine or ten different species
are to be found. Several of the African species
are to be found also in Asia, as the Lion, Leopard,
Chaus, and Caracal. In South America we find
some very distinct forms, as the Puma, the Jaguar,
the Ocelot, and in Mexico and Central America
those singular-looking, uniformly coloured, long-
bodied and long-tailed cats, the Eyra and the
Jaguarundi. North America comes next with five
species, including (besides the Puma, Jaguar, and
Ocelot, all widely distributed in the New World) two
species of Lynx, one of which, the Bay Lynx (Lyncus
rufus), is the ‘‘cat-a-mountain” of the old voyagers,
a name evidently corrupted from the Mexican Gazo
montes. lastly comes Europe with one species of
Wild Cat (Fedzs catus) and four species of lynx, two
of which must be considered as decidedly rare.
To us in England the species of all others which
possesses the most interest is undoubtedly the Wild
Cat, since it was not only extremely common at one
time in this country, but even still lingers in re-
duced numbers in the northern parts of Scotland.

1 For further historical notices of the Hunting Leopard in
Europe, see the chapter on ‘‘ Hunting with the Cheeta.”
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 163

By some authors it is regarded as the original
stock from which our domestic cats are descended ;
but although, through repeated crossing with this

 

A WILD CAT.

indigenous wild species, the breed of domestic cats
has been materially affected,“it is most probable
that the earliest domesticated individuals seen in
Britain were not reclaimed kittens of the native
164 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

wild species, but were imported from abroad, very
likely by the Romans. This view seems
strengthened by the fact that the early Britons set
great store by their cats; fixed their value by law,
according to their age; and imposed penalties for
destroying them. This they probably would not
have done if they were common, or could be easily
procured by rearing wild kittens and taming them.
According to the Welsh laws of Howel Dha, who.
died in 948, after a reign of thirty-three years over
South Wales and eight years over the whole
Principality, the value of a kitten before it could
see was fixed at a penny; after it had caught a
mouse, twopence; and when it had become an
expert mouser, fourpence, which in those days, it
must be remembered, was a large sum. If anyone
killed a cat belonging to the king’s household, the
animal was suspended by its tail in the granary
so that its nose just touched the floor, and the
delinquent had to forfeit, by way of fine, as much
corn as, when heaped up on the floor, would
exactly hide the cat from view.

In England in former days the Wild Cat was.
included amongst the beasts of chase, and is often
mentioned in royal grants giving liberty to inclose
forest land and license to huntthere. Extracts from
several such grants will be found in Zhe Zoologist
for 1878, p. 251, and 1880, p. 251. Nor was it
for diversion alone that the Wild Cat was hunted.
Its fur was much used as trimming for dresses, and
in this way was worn even by nuns at one time.
Thus in Archbishop Corboyle’s ‘‘ Canons,” anno
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 165

1127, it is ordained “that no abbess or nun use
more costly apparel than such as is made of lambs’
or cats’ skins,” and as no other part of the animal
but the skin was of any use here, it grew into a
proverb that “ You can have nothing of a cat but
her skin.”

The Wild Cat is believed to be now extinct, not
only in England and Wales, but in a great part
of the south of Scotland. Some years ago a
Scottish naturalist resident in Stirlingshire (Mr
J. A. Harvie Brown) took a great deal of trouble,
by means of printed circulars addressed to the
principal landowners throughout Scotland and the
Isles, to ascertain the existing haunts of the Wild
Cat in that part of the United Kingdom. The result
of his inquiries, embodying some very interesting
information, was published in Zhe Zoologist for
January 1881. The replies which he received
indicated pretty clearly, although perhaps unex-
pectedly, that there are now no wild catsin Scotland
south of a line drawn from Oban on the west coast
up the Brander Pass to Dalmally, and thence
following the borders of Perthshire to the junction
of the three counties of Perth, Forfar, and Aberdeen,
northward to Tomintoul, and so to the city of
Inverness. We are assured that it is only to the
northward and westward of this line that the animal
still keeps a footing in suitable localities, finding its
principal shelter in the great deer forests. Thus we
see the Wild Cat is being gradually driven north-
ward before advancing civilisation and the increased
supervision of moors and forests. Just as the Rein-
166 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

deer in the twelfth century was driven northward
from England and found its last home in Caithness,
and as the Wolf followed it a few centuries later, so
we may expect one day that the Wild Cat will come
to be numbered amongst the “extinct British
animals.” The writer of the article “Cat” in the
Encyclopedia Britannica expresses the opinion
that the Wild Cat still exists in Wales and in
the north of England, but gives no proof of its
recent occurrence there. From time to time we see
reports in the newspapers to the effect that a Wild
Cat has been shot or trapped in some out-of-the-
way part of the country; but it usually turns out to
be a large example of the domestic cat, coloured like
the wild form. It is remarkable that when cats in
England are allowed to return to a feral state, their
offspring, in the course of generations, show a
tendency to revert to the wild type of the country ;
partly, no doubt, in consequence of former inter-
breeding with the wild species when the latter was
common throughout all the wooded portions of the
country, and partly because the light-coloured
varieties of escaped cats, being more readily seen
and destroyed, are gradually eliminated, while the
darker wild type is perpetuated. The great increase
in size observable in the offspring of escaped
domestic cats is no doubt due to continuous living
on freshly-killed warm-blooded animals, and to the
greater use of the muscles which their new mode of
life requires. In this way, I think, we may account
for the size and appearance of the so-called “ wild
cats,” which are from time to time reported south
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 167

of the Tweed. Perhaps the last genuine wild cat
seen in England was the one shot by Lord

 

WILD CAT SPRINGING ON ITS PREY.

Ravensworth at Eslington, Northumberland, 1853 ;?
1 Trans. Tyneside Nat. Field Club, 1894, vol. vi., p. 123.
168 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

although so late as March 1883 a cat was shot
in Bullington Wood, Lincolnshire, which in point
of size, colour, and markings was said to be
indistinguishable from the wild Fedes catus.
Bullington Wood is one of an almost continuous
chain of great woodlands, extending from Mid-
Lincolnshire to near Peterborough. Much of the
district has never been preserved for game, and
keepers are few and far between; hence the
wild animals have enjoyed an almost complete
immunity from persecution. Cats are known to
have bred in these woods in a wild state for
generations, and there is no improbability that the
cat in question may have descended directly from
the old British Wild Cat. Under all the circum-
stances, however, it seems more likely to be a case
of reversion under favourable conditions from the
domestic to the wild type.

In Ireland, strange to say, notwithstanding
reports to the contrary, all endeavours to find a
genuine Wild Cat have failed, the so-called ‘wild
cat” of the natives, proving to be the “ marten cat,”
a very different animal.

We thus come back to the question with which
we started, namely, the question of origin of the
domestic cat, and the conclusion, I think, at which
we must arrive is, that although Fels catus has
contributed to the formation of the existing race of
domestic cats in Europe, it is not the sole ancestor.
Several wild species of Egyptian and Indian origin
having been ages ago reclaimed, the interbreed-
ing of their offspring and crossing with other
ORIGIN OF THE DOMESTIC CAT 169

wild species in the countries to which they have
been at various times exported, has resulted in the
gradual production of the many varieties, so differ-

ent in shape and colour, with which we are now
familiar.

aT yy
y Ps

~~.

I =

 

A MODERN VARIETY.
HUNTING WITH THE CHEETA

Many animals of the cat tribe, from the lion to the
domestic cat, have been trained to the chase from a
very early period, and some of them are still used
for that purpose in certain countries of the East.
The Lion, Tiger, Leopard, and especially the
Cheeta, as well as the Caracal, or Desert Lynx,
have all played their parts in the chase in Asia and
Egypt at different periods. Hunting with the
Cheeta was even introduced into Europe during
the fourteenth century, and Leopards (as Cheetas
were formerly called, from the supposition that they
were a cross between the lion and the panther,
eo and gard) figured in the hunting establishments of
the French kings and certain Italian princes
between the end of the fifteenth and beginning of
the seventeenth centuries.

We learn from Sir Gardner Wilkinson’s work
that the ancient Egyptians, who must have been
skilful in taming and training wild animals, “ hunted
with lions which were trained expressly for the
chase, like the Cheeta or hunting leopard of
India, being brought up from cubs in a tame state.”
This assertion is disputed by Lenoirmont, in his
Recherches sur l’ Histoire des Animaux Domestigques,
although he admits the no less remarkable fact
that lions were formerly employed in war.

170
HUNTING WITH THE CHEETA 171

When Elian wrote, in the third century of our
era, the natives of India knew how to train the
black-maned lion of that country for the chase,
leading it in a slip. The Greeks and Romans also
tamed wild beasts of various kinds, including lions
and tigers, the Romans from the time of Marc
Anthony (as we learn from Pliny) employing lions
to draw processional cars, although it does not
appear that they ever used them for hunting.
Many instances of the use of lions by the Roman
emperors for drawing chariots will be found quoted
by Ranking in his Wars and Sports of the Alongols
and Romans (4to, 1826, pp. 320, 321); amongst
others a quotation from Capitolinus, to the effect
that Gordian possessed no less than sixty lions
and thirty leopards tamed.

With regard to the Tiger, we learn from Marco
Polo that the Great Khan of Tartary had a number
of leopards and lynxes trained to hunt, as well as
several ‘great lions” (as he terms them) with
splendidly coloured skins striped with black and
white, which were trained to take wild boars, wild
cattle, deer, roebucks, and other beasts, and were
taken to the field in cages drawn oncarts. Although
this description evidently points to the employment
of tigers in the chase, it is very difficult to believe
that men in any age could be found to tame and
handle so ferocious an animal.

The training of the Cheeta and the Caracal, or
Desert Lynx, would be a much simpler matter, and,
as we know by the relation of modern travellers
who have been eye-witnesses of the sport, is still
172 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

practised in Persia and Syria; while numerous
descriptions of the chase have been written by
English sportsmen in India.

In the Revue Britannigue for October 1885 will
be found a very interesting article on ‘“ Hunting
with the Cheeta,” written by Baron Dunoyer de
Noirmont, the highest authority in France on the
history of the chase. In this article he traces the
progress of this kind of sport from the earliest
times, and gives some curious details on the
subject, collected from various authors, ancient
and modern. The name Cheeta is the ordinary
English representation of the Hindustani word, of
which the modern spelling in European characters
is Chita, the Arabs call it Fadh. The employment
of this animal for the chase seems to have been
known in the East from a very early period. It is
figured on Assyrian bas-reliefs in the act of seizing
an antelope, and is represented also on Egyptian
monuments dating about 1700 B.c., amongst the
animals brought in by way of tribute to the kings of
Thebes by the black tribes of the Upper Nile, led
in a slip with a very ornamental collar.

The Crusaders found this kind of sport much in
vogue with the Mussulman princes of Syria; and
the Emperor Frederick II., who made a journey to
Jerusalem in 1228, and came back half a Saracen,
mentions in his treatise De Arte Venandi both the
Cheeta and the Lynx amongst the animals used
for hunting.

A celebrated Arabic writer on hunting and
hawking—Sidi Mohamed el Mangali—a French
HUNTING WITH THE CHEETA 173

translation of whose work I have reviewed in
another volume,’ enters in great detail upon the
mode of taming and training the Cheeta, as prac-
tised in his day, about a.p. 1348, deprivation of
food and sleep being the chief means employed.
Tippoo Sahib, the last Sultan of Mysore, who

 

 

THE CHEETA.

was killed at the taking of Seringapatam in 1799,
was, like most eastern potentates, an enthusiastic
sportsman, and kept no less than sixteen trained
Cheetas. Two of these were sent to England,
and were kept at Windsor until they died.

This kind of sport is still practised in India,

1 Essays on Sport and Natural History, pp. 362-370.
174 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

just as in the days of Tippoo Sahib. The Cheeta,
hooded like a falcon, and held by a stout collar and
cord, is carried to the field on a bullock-cart, on
which he sits side by side with the native keeper
who has charge of him, and who pats and caresses
him from time to time. The cart proceeds across
country until any deer or antelopes are seen. The
driver then advances circuitously, gradually narrow-
ing his circle until he gets within one or two
hundred yards of the nearest antelope, which,
accustomed to see the native carts of the country,
does not at first take much notice of that which
carries the Cheeta. As soon as he is near enough
the driver stops, and the keeper removes the hood
of the Cheeta, which springs lightly from the cart,
and commences his stalk, availing himself of every
bush and hillock between himself and his prey as
he stealthily approaches it. When within forty or
fifty yards he jumps up, and in a series of magnifi-
cent bounds dashes at the nearest antelope, and
generally brings it down, fastening at once upon
its throat and killing it. It sometimes happens,
however, that the intended victim gets too gooda
start, and the Cheeta, failing to overtake it within
a reasonable distance, gives up the chase and
returns sulkily to his keeper, who feeds and re-
hoods him. In the event of a kill, the keeper runs
up with a tin bowl, and, cutting the deer’s throat,
fills the bowl with the blood, which he allows the
Cheeta to lap up, until, watching a favourable
opportunity, he slips on the hood and leads the
animal back to the cart. The sportsmen who go
HUNTING WITH THE CHEETA 175

out on these occasions are either mounted on
horseback, or go in pairs on bullock-carts like that
which carries the Cheeta.

With regard to the introduction of this kind of
sport into Europe, Baron de Noirmont tells us
that, although it was not unknown formerly to the
Greeks and Romans, and the Crusaders brought
back reports of what they had seen of it in Syria,
yet it was not until the fourteenth century that
trained leopards were actually seen in Europe.
The Italians, he says, were the first to introduce
them, having the best opportunities for procuring
them, owing to their constant trade with the
Mussulman princes of the East. When, in 1459,
a French Ambassador, sent by the Duke of
Burgundy to Pope Pius II., stopped on his way
at Milan, and hunted with Francis Sforza, first
Duke of Milan, he was astonished to see leopards
carried on horseback (on a pillion behind their
owners) and slipped at hares, which they coursed
and killed.

Baron de Noirmont mentions other instances of
the use of the Cheeta in Italy, and adds that both
Charles VIII. and Louis XII. of France kept
trained animals of this kind, with which they killed
hares and roedeer. After a kill, the Cheeta, on
being shown a little blood in a tin bowl, would
leave its prey and jump on the horse’s crupper
behind its master. One would imagine that
the horse would require almost as much training
as the Cheeta to stand quiet in such circum-
stances.
176 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Francis I., who ascended the throne of France
in 1515, also had his hunting leopards which,
according to Gesner (Hist. Anim.), were of two
kinds. From his description the smaller kind must
have been a Lynx. They must have been very
docile, for, he says, the keeper scarcely mounted
his horse before the beast jumped up after him, and
seated itself on a cushion behind the saddle.
Henry II., the successor of Francis I., in 1547
continued this kind of sport, and it appears to have
been patronised at the French Court until the days
of Henry IV., when the last trained leopards seen
in France were those brought by Marie de Medicis
from Florence in 1601. After that date, says
Baron de Noirmont, they were no longer to be
seen either in France or Italy, although in Germany
the sport was revived by Leopold I., who died in
1705.

4So far as I am aware, there is no record of the
use of the hunting leopard in England. Even
James I., great sportsman as he was, drew the line
there. But an experiment (it can hardly be called
anything more) was once made in this direction by
the Duke of Cumberland, brother of George IV.,
with one of the two Cheetas of Tippoo Sahib,
which, as above mentioned, were brought to
Windsor in 1799. The Duke made a large in-
closure in the park with strong netting 15 feet high,
into which he turned a stag from Windsor Forest.
The Cheeta was then brought in by two Indian
attendants and unhooded. The stag showed fight,
lowering his horns; and the Cheeta, disliking the
HUNTING WITH THE CHEETA = 177

look of his opponent, bounded over the nets, and,
dashing through the terrified crowd of spectators,
pursued and killed a fallow deer at no great
distance; and so ended, it is said, the first and
last attempt at hunting with the Cheeta in this
country.

   

DP

i \y i N
y RF
{ i N \
4 , \ {
y 4 \ \
y |

HOOD FOR CHEETA
SHEEP-DOG TRIALS

A FEW years ago it was my good fortune to be
present at the annual sheep-dog trials which are held
at Llanberis, one of the loveliest spots in North
Wales, and one which, from the beauty of its lake
and mountain scenery, has been not inaptly termed
the Chamouni of Wales. Imagine yourself in a
mountain valley beyond the village. Behind you
the old coach road, on the other side of which lies
a sombre, placid lake, from whose shores on the
far side abruptly rise the famous slate quarries of
Dinorwic, towering high above the water. Down
their steep sides incessantly come rolling avalanches
of broken slate and rubbish, thrown out in truckloads
by the men at work in the quarries. Falling at
first with a crash, they come slipping, sliding,
scattering down the hill, with a muffled roll like
distant thunder, till they fall with a gigantic splash
into the lake below, or partly rest in rugged dis-
order at the very edge of the water. Year by year
in this way tons upon tons of solid matter come
tumbling into the lake, whose circumference by this
means becomes more and more narrowed, until,
if the world last long enough, the day must come
when the lake will be filled up, and hill and vale

become merged in one vast rugged plateau.
178
SHEEP-DOG TRIALS 179

The amphitheatre, of which this is the back-
ground, is a bright green meadow of a few acres,
on Tynllan Farm, in which a crowd of a couple of
hundred spectators stand in a great semi-circle,
with their backs to the road above mentioned. In
front of them, bounding the meadow, is a gravelly
burn, shallow on the left, with stepping-stones in its
bed, deeper to the right, and with a steep bank to-
wards the spectators. Immediately on the other side
we see the moorland, with its huge boulders lying
scattered in all directions, between which lie patches
of purple heather and clumps of fern, while here
and there the brown and purple tones of the land-
scape are relieved by the green patches of mountain
grass, on which the sheep love to pasture. High
above all, and far beyond, towers the Snowdon
range of rugged mountains, Snowdon itself being
too far back and enveloped in cloud to be seen from
the meadow where we are standing. Insensibly the
moorland slopes upward until the boulders get grey
and indistinct, and the purple hue of the heather is
lost in the distance. Half-way up the mountain
side a loose stone wall runs horizontally across the
moor. Behind this, and out of sight of the specta-
tors in the valley, is a pen of sheep, from which a
shepherd, also concealed from view, lets out three
sheep at a time through a gap in the wall, at a flag
signal from the judge in the meadow. The part
which each dog entered for the trial has to play is
to leave the meadow at word of command, cross
the burn, go up the hill, find the sheep, which very
often, from the nature of the ground, he does not
180 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

see until he is close to them (being guided towards.
them by signal from his owner), bring them down
the hill to the burn, force them to cross it into the
meadow, and then pen them between three hurdles
set in form of a triangle, open only to some
eighteen inches at the apex. The distance the
sheep have to be driven is, perhaps, half a mile,
and the time allowed for the feat fifteen minutes.
Any dog failing to pen his sheep within the
specified time is disqualified, although an allowance
is made if he pens one, or two, of the three.

No one who has not seen Welsh sheep go across.
country in front of a dog can form an idea of their
activity and pace. It is something marvellous.
On catching sight of the dog, who, it must be re-
membered, is a stranger to them, they bolt ; some-
times together, sometimes in different directions.
If a stone wall happens to run down the hill at right
angles to that behind which the pen is formed (and
of these there are several), over they go like cats,
and perhaps take up hill again at top speed. The
dog at once heads and turns them; they run down
alongside the wall, but on the wrong side of it.
They must be put at it, and sent over. Perhaps
on re-jumping the wall they take a headlong course
for the next hill, and, on being stopped by the dog,
scatter in very broken and difficult ground on which
to work. One of them, perhaps, will turn round a
great boulder and be lost to sight. The dog then
sticks to the other two, and, after a great deal of
driving and turning, at length brings them to the
edge of the burn. Here they refuse, dashing to.
SHEEP-DOG TRIALS 181

the right or left, sometimes even going in opposite
directions. Again the dog recovers them, and, by
short rapid turns, puts them once more at the
brook. This time they seem almost to tumble in,
and, wading through the shallow water, scramble
up the opposite bank on the meadow side. Here

 

A SCOTCH COLLIE DOG.

they are; the spectators are called upon to stand
back as far as possible, while the sheep are brought
towards the pen. Then comes the difficult climax ;
to get the excited sheep (two or three, as the case
may be) into so small a pen, through so small an
opening, is indeedaclever feat. Although a couple
of hundred are looking on, not a sound is uttered
by anyone; indeed, a single word from the judge
182. RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

or the man who is working the dog would be dis-
tinctly heard, so still and silent is the delighted
crowd. The sheep advance hesitatingly, approach
the pen, almost touch it, but will not enter. At
this juncture the shepherd is allowed to help his dog,
and, while 4e stands on one side of the pen, the dog
goes round them on the other, and, by wonderful
management, gets them coaxingly up to the
opening. The leading sheep hesitates for a
moment, but, as both dog and master remain then
quite still, it gains confidence, walks in, its com-
panions (or companion, if one, as sometimes
happens, has been lost) follow, and the shepherd
then blocks the entrance. A ringing cheer goes
up from the crowd, the judge makes his note of
the performance, the sheep are removed to a pen
in the rear, and another dog is called up for trial.
There were, perhaps, forty dogs on the ground,
all led in collar and chain, under pain of being
disqualified if found loose, except when called up
for trial. For the ‘first-class stakes” there were
thirteen entries, for the ‘‘second-class stakes”
twenty, the owners hailing from places with such
quaint-sounding names as Pen-y-clogwyn, Twlc
Llanllyfni, Mynydd, Cilgwyn, Llwynbedw, Ysgubor,
Tynyfawnog, and Tyn-y-nant. Many of the dogs
were of the true ‘‘ Scotch Collie” type, well-shaped,
good-looking animals, both rough and smooth
coated ; but there were also deveeal of a very
different type—the old-fashioned “ drover'’s dog,”
short-haired, short-tailed, currish-looking animals,
some of them appearing to possess some terrier
SHEEP-DOG TRIALS 183

strain in them. There was a great difference in
the way the competitors did their work. Some
dogs would take twice as much exercise as others
in bringing their sheep down, and would hurry
them too much over rough ground, thereby scatter-
ing them very often, and perhaps losing one or two,

 

AN OLD ENGLISH SHEEP-DOG.

or getting them to the pen in such an excited, over-
heated state, that they would bolt right and left of
it rather than enter it. Other dogs, taking it more
quietly after going fast up the hill, having found
their sheep, would bring them down steadily and
well together, giving them time at difficult places
to pick their way amongst the boulders and loose
184 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST.

stones that lay scattered about, seldom barking, and
altogether behaving in the most intelligent way.
In this sort of dog was found the winner of the
first-class stakes, Fan, the property of David
Rowlands, of Talysarn. A small, light-made
collie,’ compared with many of the others, she
proved herself as fast as most of them in going up
for her sheep, and very superior in her style of
bringing them down. Collecting them quietly, and
starting them in the right direction, she did not
over-drive them, and so long as they were going
right, she stood still and watched them. It was
only when they got too much to the right or left
that she headed and turned them, allowing them
then to proceed quietly as before, finally bringing
them up to the pen so gently, and in such an
unflurried condition that they could not but walk
in quietly.

1 The term ‘‘collie” affords an example of the curious changes
which sometimes take place in the meaning of words. Originally
applied to the Scottish black-faced and black-legged sheep, from
the A.S. col, black, the shepherd’s dog was naturally known as

the “collie dog,” and by wrongly abbreviating this to ‘‘collie,”
the name gradually got transferred from the sheep to the dog.
SWAN UPPING

Amoncst the old customs which still survive in
connection with city companies is the annual
practice of ‘‘swan upping,” or taking up the swans
on the river Thames, at the end of July or
beginning of August, for the purpose of marking
them, so as to denote their ownership. The
practice is a very ancient one, regulated by Acts
of Parliament and Orders in Council, and was
originally not confined to the Thames, but extended
to all parts of England. I have numerous notes on
this subject relating to swanneries and swan-marks
in the counties of Lancaster, Norfolk, Suffolk,
Lincoln, Cambridge, Huntingdon, Middlesex, Dor-
set, and Somerset, but for our present purpose need
only refer to those which relate to the Thames.
The privilege of keeping swans—a royal bird—
seems to have extended back as far, at least, as
1483, as appears by laws and orders made in that
year and in the year 1496. In creating this privi-
lege the Crown granted swan-marks (cyguznote) to
denote ownership, and the books or rolls of swan-
marks that have come down to us are amongst the
most curious relics of the past. Formerly no one
might keep swans who was not possessed of free-

hold land of the yearly value of 5 marks, and under
Id5
186 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

a Statute of 22 Edw. IV., the swans or cygnets of
any person not so qualified might be seized, and
became forfeited to the king. Every owner of
swans, however, had to pay 6s. 8d. for a license to
keep them, although this license did not require
renewing, for it was available for the life of the
holder. That being settled, the next point was to
denote the ownership of every bird by causing a
mark to be made upon its bill, and this had to be
arranged with the royal swanherd, or, as he was.
then called, the ‘‘ Master of the Swans,” who kept
a book or roll for the purpose, in which the mark
of every private owner was entered, and could be
referred to at any time in case of dispute. From
time to time commissions were issued for holding
‘* Swanherds’ Courts” or ‘‘ Swan-mootes,” at which
Orders were made ‘where and when they were fitand
necessary for the preservation of swans.” These
Orders were copied out and made known by pro-
clamation in market towns. Two such copies are
now before me; one, of Elizabeth’s time, in MS.,
dated 1598, the other of Charles I.’s time, printed,
and dated 1632. The later, a small quarto tract
of considerable rarity, is entitled, ‘‘ Zhe Orders,
Lawes, and Ancient Customes of Swanns, Caused
to be printed by John Witherings, Esquire, Master
and Governour of the Royal game of Swans and
Signets throughout England. Published by August
Mathewes, 1632.”

The Orders of Elizabeth’s day contain twenty-
seven sections; those of Charles’s time contain
thirty-five, and they purport to provide for every
SWAN UPPING 187

possible contingency that could arise in dispute
regarding ownership and the proper protection of
swans. The law relating to these birds, as appears
by Statutes of Edward IV. and Henry VII., was
very severe. Any person killing a swan, or even
driving one away from his own ground if offering
to breed there, was liable to a year’s imprisonment,

 

THAMES SWANS.

and fine, at the king’s pleasure, of 13s. 4d.; and any-
one stealing the eggs incurred a penalty of 13s. 4d.
for every egg taken. If a dog drove a sitting
swan off her nest, his master forfeited 13s. 4d.; and
if the dog killed the swan, his owner had to pay
4os., whether he was present or not. By way of
still further protecting swans in the nesting time, no
one was permitted to hunt ducks or other waterfowl
188 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

near the haunt of swans “with any dogges or
spanylls from the feast of Easter to the Sunday
next after Trinitie Sunday, uppon payne to forfeit
6s. 8d.;” while the setting of any snare, net, line,
or other engine to take bitterns or swans was
punishable with the like fine. Nor could anyone
draw a net in the river between the beginning of
May and Lammastide without incurring a penalty
of 208.

The origin of the names ‘‘ Cob” and “ Pen” for
the male and female swan respectively is traceable
to these ancient Laws and Orders for Swans, in
which the sexes are invariably so designated.
Thus, in 1598, we find it ‘‘ordeyned” that if any
brood be found being led by one swan, the swan
and cygnets ‘‘shall be seized for the king, till due
proof be had whose they are, and whose was the
swan that is away, be it cod or fen,” for, if the
swan of one owner paired with that of another, there
was a regulation as to the division of the brood
in swan-upping time, when the cygnets were
allotted and marked accordingly. The rule was
thus worded in 1632: ‘In all common streames
and private waters when cignets are taken up
the owner of the Cod must chuse the first cignet,
and the Pez the next, and so in order. But if
there be three, then the owner of the grasse where
they breed must have the third, for the spoyle of
his grasse.” At the present day in the case ofa
mixed brood the cygnets are divided between the
two owners.

Although no “Swanherds’ Courts” are now
SWAN UPPING 189

held nor any proclamations made, and the office of
‘“Master of the Swans throughout England” is
abolished, many of the old orders are still adhered

 

THE SWAN'S NEST.

to for their own protection by those who keep
swans upon the Thames. The owners thus
privileged at the present day are His Majesty the
King, the Vintners’ Company, and the Dyers’
Company, and the old custom of marking the birds
1909 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

as soon as the young broods are sufficiently well
grown is annually observed. Each has his own
swanherd, and at the appointed time they meet at
London Bridge and proceed up the river in boats
by stages, the ceremony occupying four days.
According to the old practice (1598) the “ upping”
was “ordeyned” to begin “upon the Monday next
after Trinity Sunday,” but it now takes place much
later, usually commencing on the third Monday in
July. The stages are from London Bridge to
Ditton ; Ditton to Staines; Staines to Bray; and
Bray to Henley; the number of swans upon the
river being so great (between 400 and 500) that it
is not possible to catch and mark them all in less
time than four days.

The alteration of date for the ceremony seems
to have been made at least so long ago as James I.’s
time, since there is an entry in the First Court Book
of the Vintners’ Company as follows: “1o July
1609. Swan-uppers for this yeare elected. The
care of the birds confided to them. The Swanherd
of the Company, with His Majesty’s Swanherd,
and the Swanherd of the Dyers’ Company assemble
at Lambeth, zz August, and proceed up the river to
mark the swans.”

One of theearliest entries, however, in the records
of this company, shows that the swans on occasion
were “‘upped” in winter. Thus, under date 15009,
we find the entry: ‘ Payd, in the grete frost, to
James, the under swanherd, for uppyng of the
maister’s swannes, iiijs.” This ‘‘uppyng,” however,
in all probability was not for the purpose of mark-
SWAN UPPING 191

ing them, for there would be no cygnets at that
season, but with the object of penning them and
feeding them at a time when, by reason of the
frost, they would be unable to obtain their natural
food. At the present day many of the Thames
swans are taken up in winter, turned into barns
and outhouses, and fed, the caretakers being
rewarded by the swanherds for their pains.

Why only two of the city companies should
have been thus privileged to keep swans and
mark them is now not easy to ascertain. The
Dyers’ Company received their charter from
Edward IV. in 1473; that of the Vintners’
Company, granted in the same reign, was renewed
by Henry VI., and it has been suggested that, as
the last-named monarch was fond of swans,
it might have been good policy on his part to
interest two powerful city guilds, both having
their halls on the river side, where they still remain
(Dyers’ Hall Wharf and Vintry Wharf in Upper
Thames Street), in the preservation of the birds
by a grant of arms and swan marks. But this is
more or less a matter of conjecture, for all the
early records of the Dyers’ Company were unfor-
tunately destroyed in the Great Fire of 1666.

In the summer of 1895, having been invited
by the Swan Warden of the Vintners’ Company
to assist at the ceremony of ‘‘swan-upping,”’ I
was not slow to avail myself of the privilege, and a
more animated or picturesque-scene could hardly be
witnessed. The weather was propitious, the river
at its best, the banks in the upper reaches being
192 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

clothed with a profusion of wild flowers of every
hue. The yellow marigold and hawksbit, the toad-
flax and lady’s slipper (Lotus corniculatus), the blue
speedwell, the purple loose-strife, the scabious, and
the vetch, the white meadow-sweet, the comfrey, and
the great ox-eye daisy, with many others, peeped
forth from the banks, or showed in the meadows
beyond as we journeyed up-stream, while overhead
the swifts and the sand martins were our constant
companions. The procession, too, was a gay one.
There were six boats in all, each swanherd having
two under his control, the Queen’s men in scarlet,
the Dyers’ in blue, and the Vintners’ in blue and
white, while the boats were still further distinguished
by the fluttering pennons, on which were borne the
insignia of the Queen and the two civic companies.
Rowing leisurely in single file until swans were
sighted, the order was then given to close in round
the birds in a semi-circle. The swanherd’s crook
was then brought into requisition, and as each swan
in turn was brought alongside and seized, it was
lifted bodily into a boat, its legs tied together over
its back, and for a short time lay helpless, until put
ashore with the rest of its companions in order to
be marked. After every catch, the swanherds
landed to examine the birds and mark them accord-
ing as they were found to belong to the Queen, or
the Vintners’, or the Dyers’ Company.

A good deal of nonsense has been written on the
supposed cruelty of marking swans, and some years
ago (in January 1878) the Society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals was so ill advised as to
SWAN UPPING 193

prosecute the swanherds of all three owners with a
view to abolish the practice. The writer was
invited to attend as a witness on behalf of the prose-
cution, but declined, on the ground that a time-
honoured custom, which had been regulated by
Statutes and Orders in Council, was not likely to

 

NEWLY HATCHED CYGNETS.

be set aside by a magistrate’s order made at petty
sessions. This view proved to be correct, the
summonses were dismissed, and nothing further
has since been heard of the matter.

As an eye-witness of the mode of marking the
old swans and pinioning the cygnets, I am prepared
to affirm that the swanherds not only handle the

N
194 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

birds as gently as possible in catching them and tying
their legs, but in nicking the bills. The incisions
made on the upper mandible are comparatively so
superficial that the slight hemorrhage which follows
is soon checked when the bird, on being liberated,
plunges its beak under water.

The swan marks now in use are simpler than
they used to be, as will be seen by the accompany-
ing illustrations.

As to the number of swans at present main-
tained on the Thames, the following statistics will
be of interest. In 1887 there were 392; in 1888,
the number was 343. In 1893 the Queen had 142
old swans and 60 young; the Vintners’ Com-
pany, 91 old and 48 young: the Dyers’, 68 old
and 36 young: inall 445. In 1894, only five more
were counted, their increase being counteracted
by casualties, swamped nests, addled eggs, acci-
dents to cygnets, deaths in winter, and the annual
annexation of about thirty birds which are
taken up to be fattened for the royal larder at
Windsor.

Although four days are spent annually in catch-
ing them, it is not always possible to follow them
up the back waters and side streams, along many of
which a boat cannot pass. Those birds, however,
that temporarily escape, get subsequently hooked
by the swanherds, and marked when they come out
into the river again.

As the boats in procession pass in front of the
Castle at Windsor, a pretty custom is observed
which ought not to pass unnoticed. The boats of
SWAN UPPING 195

the Vintners’ and Dyers’ Companies draw up on
either side of the river in single file, the crews
standing up with oars erect, while the royal

THAMES SWAN MARKS.

OLD MARK OF THE VINTNERS’ CO. OLD MARK OF THE DYERS’ Co.

SWAN MARKS IN PRESENT USE.

 

THE KING. THE VINTNERS’ Co, THE DYERS’ CO.

boats row slowly in single file between them, during
which time three ringing cheers are given for His
Most Gracious Majesty. The animation of the
whole scene, the bright colours of the crews, each
with a swan’s feather in his cap, the dazzling white-
196 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

ness of the swans, the drenching spray cast up by
powerful pinions in the frantic but unavailing
effort to “run the blockade,” and the gaping crowd
of amused bystanders on the banks, form a Zout
ensemble, the picturesqueness of which may be more
readily imagined than described.

At the time of penning these remarks, although
the annual ceremony was long over (having taken
place in July), the official returns of the number of
swans caught and marked had not been rendered
by the swanherds, so that a comparison of the
statistics for 1895 with those of 1894 had conse-
quently to be deferred. Even on the last day of
October the swanherd of the Vintners’ Company,
Mr W. T. Abnett, whose son had succeeded to the
office of Royal Swanherd, wrote that he had only
just finished marking, and that there were still two
broods of unmarked birds on the river—one at
Temple, the other at Hambledon, near Henley—
which eluded capture by working up the ditches and
back-waters, where it is difficult to get at them.

Omitting these two broods of five birds each
from his calculations, he reports that the number of
swans on the river in 1895, old and young, was
ascertained to be 411, of which 145 belonged to the
Queen, 161 to the Vintners’ Company, and 105 to
the Dyers’ Company.

As compared with the returns for 1893 and
1894, the total number is somewhat below the
average. This will be made clear by the following
tables, which show approximately the distribution
of the swans on the river at different stages
SWAN UPPING

197

(although this is liable, of course, to variation), and
the proportion of old to young birds :—

 

 

 

Queen’s. | Vintners’.} | Dyers’.

Swan Upping, 1893. | s [aah &

ise Gar ash Mss

oO 2 ° so ° o

First day . | LondontoDitton.| 9] 0}; 7) 1] 2] 0
Second day | Ditton to Staines. | 12 | 4 | 24 | 18 | 20| 17
Third day . | Staines to Bray 25° 10>) 32°) a7 et | ©
Fourth day | Bray to Henley 73,| 26] 22] 8 | 25 | 10
Marked since 35 {20} 6]| 4] of o

Totals 142 | 60 | gt | 48 | 68 | 36

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Totals.

114
152
65

445

 

Here it will be seen that in the lower reaches of
the river there were comparatively few swans, that
their numbers increased in proportion as they
escaped from the traffic of boats and warehouses,
and that they were most numerous between Bray

and Henley.

 

Swan Upping, 1894.

 

First day .

Third day . | Staines to Bray
Fourth day | Bray to Henley
Marked since

London to Ditton.
Second day | Ditton to Staines .

 

Totals

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Queen’s. | Vintners’.| Dyers’.
i) 7 th £ bh 3

Bj aS | BS eg ee
© 2 See Oo

TA) PF | -Q| be) 2 | Or BP
13 | 19 | 34 | 29 | 25 | 19 | 130
2 5 | 36/48: ):23.) 4.) 108
47 | 17 | 12. | © | to) Tr | 112
33 | 21 § | @) @} soy) “65
Laan

(32 60/96 64) 69 34) 455

 
198 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

In 1894 there was a slight increase in the total
number of birds on the river, and while the Vintners’
Company gained twenty-one, the Dyers’ Company
lost one, and the Royal swans were reduced by
ten.

 

Queen’s, | Vintners’.| Dyers’.

 

Swan Upping, 1895.

 

 

 

oh tn P or)

go) 8S pele | S

oO S ° iS ° S
First day . | Londonto Ditton. | 16} 5|17/ 6] 5] 9} 49
Second day | Ditton to Staines. | 14] 5 | 35 | 11 | 24] 8] 97
Third day . | Stainesto Bray .| 21 | 10 | 45 | 27 | 26 | 11 | 140
Fourth day | Bray to Henley . | 38 | 16] 15 | 2] 15 | 10] 96
Marked since «| 6: | ta! 34 Oh) 22-) cal 29
Totals. -| 95 | 50 1115 | 46 | 72 | 33 | 411

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In 1895 the returns show a total reduction of
forty-four birds, or twenty-six below the average
for the past three years. Taking the figures for
this period, it would appear from the foregoing
tables that the average number of swans maintained
on the river, old and young, is 437, of which 179
belong to the Crown, 153 to the Vintners’ Company,
and 104 to the Dyers’ Company. In other words
the Vintners’ Company owns about fifty more swans
than the Dyers’ Company, while the Crown has
twenty-five more than the Vintners’.

The swanherds reported that as a rule the swans
in the Thames are well treated by the public, who
feed them frequently, and do not molest the young
nor take the eggs. This, of course, has an im-
SWAN UPPING 199

portant bearing in maintaining their numbers.
Casualties unavoidably occur, such as the swamp-
ing of nests, and the consequent addling of eggs ;
the destruction of newly-hatched young by pike
or by accident; deaths from cold or starvation
in winter, although at that season many of the birds
get housed and fed; and so forth. It is pleasant
to know that the Thames-loving portion of the
public show consideration for the swans from choice,
and not from compulsion, although the swanherds
would not be slow to invoke the aid of the law
were it necessary to prevent the destruction of birds
or eggs.

As to the legal status of the birds themselves,
the principle seems to be that when a swan is
reduced lawfully into the possession of a private
person, whether it be marked or not, he may be
said to have a property in it for the purpose of an
indictment at common law for larceny or otherwise ;
but that, if the bird be at liberty in the sea, or ina
navigable river, pvzma facie it belongs to the
Crown.

Although it is not larceny to take the eggs of
swans, since the law has assigned a less punishment
for the offence by Statute, the eggs are protected
under sec. 24 of the Game Act, 1 & 2 Will. IV. cap.
32, which enacts that, “If any person not having
the right of killing the game upon any land—nor
having permission from the person having such
right—shall wilfully take out of the nest, or destroy
in the nest upon such land the eggs of any bird or
game, or of any swaz, wild duck, teal, or wigeon,
200 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

he shall, on conviction thereof before two justices
of the peace, forfeit and pay for every egg so taken
or destroyed, such sum of money not exceeding 5s.
as to the justices shall seem meet, together with the
costs of the conviction.”

In 1859, at the Spring Assizes at Reading, a
case of stealing a Swan was tried before Baron
Channell, when the defendant, one Lovejoy, was
charged with stealing a Swan belonging to the
Dyers’ Company. The learned judge held, on the
authority of Lord Hale (Pleas of the Crown, vol. i.,
p. 511), that a Swan, though at large, and a bird
sere nature, was under the circumstances the sub-
ject of larceny, being marked. The defendant was
accordingly convicted.
BIRD LIFE.ON THE BROADS

To the naturalist who is intent on observing and
not slaying such unfamiliar birds as he may meet
with in the course of his rambles, there are few
more attractive places in England than the Norfolk
Broads. And this for several reasons. They lie
out of the beaten track, and to be seen must be
made the object of a special expedition ; the scenery
is very unlike what most people are accustomed to,
reminding one more of Holland than of England,
while the class of birds one meets with at every
turn are more or less of a kind unfamiliar to the
majority of wayfarers. This, of course, might be
expected from the general aspect of the country,
which is swz generzs, and characterised by its ex-
treme flatness, the superabundance of water, the
absence of trees, and the luxuriant growth of sedge,
bullrush, and yellow iris. Deep, sedgy “ ronds,”
or dense masses of reeds and rushes shut out at
times the adjacent marshes. On the one hand, to
quote Mr Stevenson, a wide expanse of swampy
ground, relieved here and there with belts of alder
and birch, or dwarf coverts suggestive of pheasants
and woodcocks in autumn, blends broad with
broad; on the other, some slight recess in the

waving reed screen is covered in summer with a
201
202 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

profusion of water-lilies, or an alder carr, fringing
the water's edge, casts a grateful shade in strange
contrast to the surrounding glare. Everywhere
the rich aquatic herbage teems with bird life.

To enjoy these unwonted surroundings to the
full there is no better plan than to hire a punt, and,
under the skilful guidance of a marsh man, explore
the reedy labyrinths that lead gradually from the
margin of the broad to the open water. Indeed,
this is the only mode of ensuring a glimpse of birds
at close quarters, for were one to adopt the
alternative of trying to walk round the broad, such
denizens as Coots, Moor-hens, and Grebes would
only be seen swimming at a distance, while the
smaller species, such as the Reed and Sedge
Warblers, the Bearded Tit and the Black-headed
Bunting, would quickly be lost to sight amongst
the dense shelter of reeds and rushes. The use of
a punt, moreover, has this advantage: it enables
the visitor to approach the waterfowl silently, and,
to a great extent, screened from their observation ;
for the punt is so low, the reed beds so high, and
the waterways so tortuous, that one may engage
all day ina series of stalks by water so effectively
as to bring one literally face to face with some of
the shyest creatures, that would not otherwise
suffer themselves to be so nearly approached.

So admirably adapted are most birds for the
particular kind of country in which they can best
get their living that, upon a rough classification
into groups representing the woodland, moorland,
downland, fenland, and coastland, it would be com-
BIRD LIFE ON THE BROADS 203

paratively easy to predict the species most likely to
be met with in any one of these situations. So in
Broadland anyone with a good knowledge of birds
may make a pretty shrewd guess beforehand what
kinds he will have a chance of observing, and, what
is more, will probably succeed in finding most of
them. There are, of course, many ubiquitous
species so generally given to wander, and to make
themselves at home under almost any conditions that
we do not expect them to observe strictly the
boundaries above indicated. Hence we need not
be surprised to see about the broads several common
birds of wide distribution which may be observed
any day without going so farafield. What we look
for, naturally, are the characteristic marsh birds,
the waders, the swimmers, and the aquatic warblers,
though something, of course, will depend upon the
time of year at which our visit is made, for the
warblers are only to be found there in summer, at
which season bird life seems always more abundant,
by reason of its being the nesting time.

As we approach the broad to step into our punt,
one of the first birds to come into view is a Peewit,
which rises near the edge of the water and flies out
over the marsh, its conspicuous black and white
plumage showing up well in the course of its char-
acteristic evolutions. Almost at the same time the
wild, tuneful note of the Redshank is heard, as first
one and then another of these birds rises from the
marsh and follows in the direction of the retreating
Peewit. A very different looking bird is the Red-
shank on the wing. Viewed from behind with
204 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

outstretched pinions, the plumage looks grey, with
a white band across the wings, and a white patch
just above the tail. The long orange-coloured legs
hang out behind as the bird rises, but are soon
concealed outstretched beneath the tail. If the
nest be near, the parent birds will hang about with

 

THE REED WARBLER.

short beats of wing, betraying their anxiety by their
cries and their reluctance to leave the spot. At
any other time they would fly right away, their wild,
musical notes being heard long after they are out of
sight,

And now, seated in the punt, field-glasses in
hand, we glide softly away from the bank, and
enter a channel which winds amongst the tall reeds,
BIRD LIFE ON THE BROADS 205

slowly and noiselessly propelled by the long pole
or “quant” of the marsh man. We catch a hasty
glimpse of a Reed Bunting, a fine cock bird, with
black head and a white collar.’ As he disappears
amongst the reeds he flirts an ample tail, in which
the outer feathers show white, an unmistakable
little bird at all times. Hardly has he disappeared

 

THE SEDGE WARBLER.

before we hear the characteristic hurrying notes of
the Sedge Warbler, ‘‘chitty, chitty, chitty, cha,
cha,” and catch sight of the bird as it quickly shifts
its position on a slanting reed stem. We easily
know it from the Reed Warbler by its mottled
appearance about the head and wings, the same
parts in the other bird being of a uniform pale

1 Its portrait appears on page 15.
206 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

brown. The ‘“Sedge-bird” nests close to the
ground, the ‘‘Reed-wren” suspends its nest
amongst the reeds, two or three of which pass
through the nest and help to support it, while its
deep, cup-shaped form serves admirably to prevent
the eggs from rolling out when swayed by the
wind.

It is, perhaps, too much to expect amongst the
little denizens of these vast reed beds a peep at
some rare species, such as the Bearded Tit or the
Marsh Warbler, so like a Reed-wren as to be with
difficulty distinguished from it, or the Aquatic
Warbler, of which only a very few examples have
been procured in this country, but which may be
detected at a glance by the three white streaks on
the head, one over each eye, the third down the
centre of the forehead. Further away in the
marsh we should hear the unmistakable trill of the
Grasshopper Warbler, though a sight of it can only
be obtained by patient watching. It loves drier
situations than any of the birds above mentioned,
and we have never seen or heard it amongst the
reeds. Along the margin of the water, where the
grass is short, the Yellow Wagtail picks its way
daintily, yet rapidly, now and again darting into
the air to catch a passing insect. A cock bird of
this species in summer time isas yellow as a canary,
and does not fail to strike with admiration the
observer who notices it for the first time.

In a similar situation, that is, on the margin of
the water, a somewhat larger bird may be seen

1 Tts portrait is given on page 17.
BIRD LIFE ON THE BROADS 207

running, its mud-coloured back harmonising so
well with the natural surroundings that when at
rest it is almost invisible, unless the eye has first
detected it while in motion. This is the Common
Sandpiper or Summer Snipe, as it is often called.
On taking flight it skims out over the water with
quick pulsations of the wing, returning in a semi-

 

THE BEARDED TIT.

circle to the shore some distance away as it utters
a sharp note and oft-repeated “weet, weet, weet.”
From the side of a marsh drain we may often see a
larger and darker Sandpiper spring up with a louder
whistle, ‘‘ tui, tui, tui,” and take the air like a Snipe,
flying not unlike one, but looking somewhat smaller,
blacker, and with a white rump, which may be
seen at a considerable distance, as in the case of
208 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the House Martin, as the bird flies away with its
back towards you. This is the Green Sandpiper
(Lotanus ochropus), which may be looked for annually
in spring and autumn, in such situations as are
commonly affected by its smaller relative above
named. Unlike other Sandpipers which nest on
the ground, this bird has a singular habit of laying
its eggs in the deserted nest of a Thrush, Magpie,
or Pigeon, sometimes at a considerable elevation,
and on this account no doubt they have often
escaped observation. From the fact of the Green
Sandpiper having been met with in pairs during
the summer months, in situations eminently suited
to its habits, it is not unlikely that it has occasion-
ally reared its young in this country, but although
there is much circumstantial evidence in that direc-
tion, the fact of its having bred in any part of the
British Islands has never been satisfactorily estab-
lished.

But now, the punt having emerged from the
reeds into the open, we see a great expanse of
water, and in the distance a lot of birds, swimming
so low as to make it difficult to distinguish the
species. But as we draw nearer to them all
doubts are resolved. Some Ducks and Teal take
wing and go off in separate parties, the latter in
close order and flying with great rapidity, the
former more scattered and with higher and heavier
flight. There still remain behind upon the surface,
and quickly making for the nearest reed bed, a
number of birds that look black in the distance,
but have a conspicuously white forehead. These
BIRD LIFE ON THE BROADS — 209

are Coots, which at first endeavour to escape by
swimming, but eventually open their wings and
scuttle over the surface of the water, and soon
disappear amongst the reeds, a few only making
their escape by diving. Water-hens, of course, are
amongst the commonest of waterfowl in such con-
genial haunts, and the Water-rail and Spotted Crake

 

THE COOT.

are also, doubtless, there, but from their skulking
habits and unwillingness to take flight, they are
seldom seen except by snipe shooters, and then,
usually, when hard pressed by a dog. Snipe breed
commonly in the adjoining marshes, once the haunt
of the Black-tailed Godwit, and the Ruff and Reeve ;
but the two last named have long since ceased to
gladden the eyes of the wandering naturalist, and
oO
210 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

now only make their appearance in much reduced
numbers during the period of their migrations in
spring and autumn.

The largest fowl of all that habitually frequent
the Broads has yet to be mentioned, namely, the
Heron. The still solitude of the place attracts him,
and he quits the marsh dykes, with their frogs and
water-rats, for a change to the reed-sheltered broad,
where he shares a fish diet with the Otter, the
Grebe, and the Kingfisher, all expert fishers in
their way. Time was when the Cormorant also
made one of them, for eighty years ago these
birds nested in Norfolk, as did also the Avocet
(1825) and, still longer ago, the Spoonbill (1671)
and the Crane (1542). But these birds are no
longer to be classed amongst the summer residents
of the marshes, any more than the Bittern, the
Godwit, the Ruff and Reeve, or the Black Tern.
These are now seldom seen, except at the period
of their migrations in spring, when a few stragglers
appear in the neighbourhood of their ancient haunts,
as if seeking for a quiet nesting-place ; or again in
autumn, when on their way south from distant
breeding grounds less disturbed. At these same
seasons the broads are visited by numbers of Black-
headed Gulls’ and several kinds of Terns, or ‘‘Sea
Swallows,” namely, the Common, the Lesser, and
the Black Tern, the last named the only one that
ever nested in the marshes, the two others invari-
ably resorting during the breeding season to the
shingle beaches by the sea.

1 The Black-headed Gull is figured on page 22.
BIRD LIFE ON THE BROADS air

Amongst the wildfowl to be seen on the Broads
in summer may be noted, besides the common Wild
Duck and Teal, the Shoveler, the Gadwall, and
the Garganey, while later in the year, when the
“foreign” ducks come in, flocks of Wigeon and
Pochard arrive, and smaller parties of Tufted

 

THE GREAT CRESTED GREBE.

Ducks. The reader who would know more of
the avifauna of the Broads may be referred to
the admirable pages of Stevenson’s Lzrds of
Norfolk, and to Lubbock’s fauna of Norfolk,
edited by Southwell, as well as to the more
recently-published volume on Zhe Norfolk Broads,
edited by W. Dutt, in which will be found an in-
teresting chapter on the birds by the Rev. M. C.
212 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Bird, as well as a detailed list of them which is
given in an appendix. In addition to these sources
of information, many valuable articles by Messrs
Gurney, Southwell, Feilden, Norgate, Upcher, and
other Norfolk naturalists, may be found in the
Transactions of the Norfolk and Norwich Natur-
alists’ Society, which, founded some thirty odd
years ago, still remains a model compendium of
local records.
SOME SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY
DECOYS

For some years past the authoritative work on
wildfowl decoys has been, and, indeed, still is, that
by Sir R. Payne Gallwey, which is so compre-
hensive in its details as to leave little room for any
additions of importance. There are, however,
sources of information which escaped his notice,
and which are of sufficient interest to deserve
mention. The following extracts will have an
attraction not only for owners of existing decoys,
but also for naturalists with antiquarian tastes, who
may glean from them some interesting particulars
concerning the now obliterated traces of the former
haunts of English wildfowl, and of the various
species which used to be captured in decoys that
have long since disappeared.

Sir William Brereton, the Parliamentary
general, who was created a baronet in 1627, and
died in 1661, lived at Handford, between Wilmslow
and Cheadle, in East Cheshire, and owned a decoy
with five pipes, near Dodleston. The present
appearance of the site is described by Messrs
Coward and Oldham in their Bzrds of Cheshire
(1900, page 162), and it is noteworthy that a farm
on the road between Dodleston and Chester is still

known as the Decoy Farm. In the working of this
213
214 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

decoy the General took much personal interest, and
lost no opportunity of visiting and inspecting others,
not only in England and Ireland, but also in
Holland, and making observations upon them in
his journal. Fortunately, as pointed out to me by
Professor Newton, his notes have been preserved.
In a MS. account of his Travels in Holland, the
United Provinces, England, Scotland, and Ireland,
in possession of Sir Philip Grey Egerton, Bart., of
Oulton Park, Cheshire, and printed in 1844 for the
Chetham Society, frequent mention is made of the
wildfowl decoys which he saw in Holland, in 1634,
and some curious details are given respecting them.
The following entries are worth quoting. On the
way to Holland, he says :—

‘““We lodged at the Ship at Quindburrow
(Queenborough), and were well used ; six lobsters
bought for 1s., one quick (z.e., alive). A con-
venient place in the remotest part of the marsh for
a ’coy” (p. 3).

Arrived in Holland, on reaching Dort, he
wrote :—

“The island whereon this fair maiden city
stands is encompassed round by the Maas and
Waal, two great navigable rivers. This island is
about six or eight English miles about, and pre-
served by a strong bank about 12 yards high,
beyond which bank are seated many (some dozen
or twenty) ’coys. We were in three ’coys, all well
wooded ; two of them adjoining close together, the
one a lesser ’coy (which is the winter ’coy), hath
fine pipes “ke unto mine. It is ten English roods
SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY DECOYS 215

long on the sides, eight roods broad ; no wildfow]
therein, but we were permitted to walk within the
hut. The ’coy ducks came boldly unto us and fed,
belonging hereunto 150 ducks, 13 drakes; dainty,
fair, spacious, and well-proportioned pipes, higher
overhead, longer and better compassed than I ever
saw in England. Twiggen nests provided for the
ducks to breed in.

“The other ’coy joining hereunto much more
spacious and larger; it hath six pipes in one end
only, thirty-five roods long and thirty broad. We
were not permitted to see this larger coy. Ducks
sold for 6d. apiece; two pellstarts (pintails), two
smeaths” (wigeon),’ two shovelars,each equivalent
to a duck, and four teals 6d.

‘‘ Another coy we saw, wherein are four pipes in
one end; a great pool. The ducks fed with barley.
The dog farm, three roods from the hut or the
pipes, and by the help of a little ladder the dog is
enabled to leap into the hole a yard high. The
fowl in the little ’coy fed with barley. But we
could not be admitted to take a full view of any of
these ’coys, neither are there any spy holes into the
pond ; but all their pipes are much more curious,
and carry a far better proportion than ours ” (p. 17).

On reaching Delft, Sir William Brereton
wrote :—

“In this town tame storks and shovelars
(spoonbills) kept tame; birds with long legs, less
bodies than our storks, and broader bills like our

1 Known as “‘smee” in Norfolk. Newton, Dict. Birds, p. 5,
v. Smew.
216 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

shovelars. After dinner went to see Gabriel
Direkson’s ’coy, a rich boor in the country, who
dwells beyond Shippley (a few miles south-west of
Delft). Heis ’coyman himself. His ’coy is seated
near his own and some other houses, and the high-
ways and navigable rivers on both sides, nearer by
much than Dodleston Bridge or Findloes House is to
my ‘coy (ze., two miles from Dodleston Bridge).
His’coy hath five pipes as mzne,but better compassed,
and two of them almost meet. Much wood, reed
grass, and thicket, within ” [which is] ‘‘the hut, so as
the fowl on one end cannot discern the dog show-
ing elsewhere. Abundance of quince trees herein
planted, which prosper very well.

“He hath about 200 ducks, 20 drakes. He hath
fowl bred betwixt pellstarts (pintails) and ducks,
about twenty." I saw some of them. Many grey
ducks (gadwalls), which are best. ’Coy dogs are
best that are either white or red, and the more hairy
the better. These ducks are as tame and familiar
about his house as any tame ones can be.

‘‘ Smeathes (wigeon) he keeps in a hut near his
house, covered with a net” (p. 23).

On June 5, Sir William Brereton reached the
Hague, where he wrote :—

“In the morning I went to see some ‘coys,
whereof here are abundance. Six in my view, two
whereof I saw, the former rented for 250 gilders,
the other for 225 gilders a year. Six here are
within half a Dutch mile. They had both three

1 Perhaps the earliest case on record of a cross between
pintail and mallard.
SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY DECOYS 17

pipes in one end, and one in the other; 200 flying
smeathes (wigeon), belonging to one ’coy; abund-
ance of pellstarts (pintail), and thirty pellstarts in
one hutch.

‘‘ These ’coys near the highways; mighty high
trees grow in both of them, so full of cover within
the hutch and without, as all ground, reed seatings,
and all, covered with wood. Here a ’coy duck
brings up chickens. Wood covereth some pipes
so thick as there is no net. Sometimes, take 200
in a day; sell them at Christmas for 1s. a duck; at
other times sometimes 6d., 7d., 8d., and od. as in
season. Trees, herein, as high as birches; their
ducks, smeathes, and pellstarts exceeding tame.”

On Saturday, June 7, 1634, Sir William
Brereton went from Leyden, as he tells us, ‘‘to
John’s father’s, in a waggon by him sent.” John
was a Dutchman employed to manage his decoy in
Cheshire, and had accompanied him to Holland to
visit his relations, and see some of the Dutch
decoys in company with his master.

‘We went about six o’clock (a.m.) and came to
Allifein, about half-past nine, which is nine English
miles... . Before ten hours we came to John’s
father, and went with him to his ’coy, wherein wood
excellently grown; apple trees, plum trees, and
cherry trees prosper very well, and shed forth
abundance of wood. The largest and neatest 'coy
house I have seen, lofted overhead to lay corn or
hemp seed; the pipes so straight, bending some
little towards you. Four pipes only until last
winter, two in either end; one more added last
218 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

winter of no use. Here, by the help of a windmill,
they can drown all the ground round about the ’coy.
On my return I went in to see (at Allifein) the
house of the Lord Offerbecke. On the back side
I saw a pool empaled, wherein were pellstarts,
smeathes, shovelars, teals, and others, and astraight
poor pipe to take fowl in.”

On his way north, to Scotland, in 1635, Sir
William Brereton visited two decoys which have
escaped notice in Sir R. Payne Gallwey’s book.
In June of that year he was at Newcastle, where he
“lodged at The Swan, at Mr Swan’s, the post-
master, and paid 8d. ordinary, and no great pro-
vision.”” Mr Swan, he remarked, was ‘a very
forward man to have a ’coy here erected.” Half-
way between Newcastle and Morpeth, that is,
about seven miles from the former town, he “took
notice of a convenient seat of a ’coy in Point Island,
which belongs to Mr Mark Errington.” All
traces of this decoy have long since disappeared,
and no allusion is made to it under the head of
‘Wild Duck,” in Hancock’s Birds of Northumber-
land, 1874. There is no evidence of the existence
at any time of a decoy in Scotland, though some
years ago the formation of one near the Bay of
Findhorn was contemplated, and, indeed, com-
menced, by Major R. Chadwick, but was never
completed. Sir William Brereton makes no
mention of any seen by him when travelling in
Scotland in 1635. But when in July of that year
he proceeded to Ireland, he found a decoy in
Wexford, which he describes as follows. As no
SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY DECOYS 19

mention of this decoy is made by Sir R. Payne
Gallwey in his book on decoys, nor by Mr Ussher,
in his Bzrds of Ireland, it is deserving of notice.
‘“About a mile hence lies a farm called ‘ The
Park,’ which is now leased unto one Mr Hardye,
an Englishman, who lives upon it, and hath an
estate in it about thirteen years. This land is
almost an island, and the rent which Mr Hardye
pays is about £16 per annum. .. . Here is the
best feeding for fowl that I ever saw. This grass,
which comes from the mud, is good food for them,
and there is good store of it; and here is a little
grove of oaks, wherein is no good timber, but it so
stands as it is most strong shelter to the fowl that
feed or frequent under it. Here is the most
commodious and convenient seat for a ’coy that ever
I saw, but there is no more room whereupon to erect
a ’coy betwixt the water and an high bank of the
wood, than four or five roods in breadth, but
sufficient in length; so as you must either make so
much of the mud firm land whereupon to build your
coy, or else you must only make good one side
with two pipes, or you must erect your work upon
a point of land, which lieth much eastward, and is
in view of the town (Wexford), and much more
inconvenient, or you must carry away abundance of
earth to make a pond and pipes in some ground as
yet much too high to the N.W. end of the wood.
Here grow ollers (alders) sufficient to plant a ’coy,
and here is sufficient wood to cleave into stakes for
alluses, and as 1 am informed reed may be provided
out of Sir Thomas Esmond’s land, which is on the
220 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

other side of the water ; and all necessaries may be
supplied by water from the Slane, Mr Hardye
demands for his interest, which is for thirteen years,
455, and will abate nothing.”

From this and what follows it would appear
that Sir William Brereton was so pleased with the
capabilities of the place for working a decoy, that
he negotiated for a lease, and the purchase of Mr
Hardye’s interest; but the landlord asked a
premium of £100 for an eighty years’ lease, which
Sir Willian Brereton thought unreasonable, and the
negotiation fell through.

On his return from Ireland, za Bristol, he
journeyed from Bridgwater to Woolavington, thence
to Marke, and to Stoke Rodney, near which last-
named place he visited a decoy which is briefly
mentioned by Sir R. Payne Gallwey, who is mis-
taken, however, in supposing that it was probably
not constructed until after 1802, in which year an
Act was passed for the drainage of the adjoining
marshes. Sir Willian Brereton saw it in 1635, and
thus describes it :—

‘About half a mile hence (z.e., from Stoke) is
Orion’s ’coy, which is placed very near a highway.
This is a large spacious ’coy pool, and wood pros-
pereth exceeding well. By reason of the drought
there was a great want of water, until it was
replenished and supplied with some late found out
springs” (p. 171).

This answers Sir R. Payne Gallwey’s surmise
that until the drainage of the marshes after 1802, the
superabundance of water rendered the working of a
SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY DECOYS 221

decoy impracticable. He does not mention the
number of pipes, but Sir William Brereton tells us
that there were five, as in hisown decoy. Headds:—

“The seatings within the ‘coy are overgrown
with wood ; abundance here is of tame fowl, drake
pellstarts, and smeathes (pintail and wigeon) I saw,
but no ducks. The ’coy house is larger than mine,
both higher and longer. .. . The owner advised
me, if it were possible, to bring a spring into my
coy: by the means hereof they took good store of
fowl last storm. I observed most part of the
ground betwixt the pipes planted with withens
(willows), except one orchard of cherry trees.
Here were three dogs of different colours, none so
little, nor seeming so nimble, as my ‘coy dogs.
Here much oats is used, as in my coy. Very few
ducks bred here this summer came to good.”

In these few extracts from the little-known
journal of a famous General, we have a substantial
addition to the history of decoys in this country,
and while on this subject, it may be well to remark
that, since Sir R. Payne Gallwey published his
authoritative work, another important discovery
has been made by Mr Southwell, who, in the sixth
volume of the TZyvansactions of the Norfolk
Naturalists Society (1897, pp. 352-359), has
published an interesting account of an old decoy
at Feltwell, in Norfolk, concerning which no infor-
mation was available when Sir R. Payne Gallwey
was collecting material for the volume in question.
In any new issue of the work, these important
additions should not be overlooked.
THE OLDEST BOOK ON FISHING

Wuatever branch of field sports may be to a
man’s liking, its early history, if he be also of a
literary turn, should be a curious subject for
inquiry. It is always interesting to ascertain the
origin of any method which experience has shown
to be successful, and to discover, if possible, the
earliest writer who thought he knew enough of
his subject to attempt to instruct others. For the
earliest treatise on hunting in England we have to
go back to the time of Edward II., to a little tract
in Norman French, composed, about 1320, by the
King’s huntsman, Guillaume Twici, for the purpose
(as he tells us) of teaching others what he himself
had learnt in his time. The art of falconry found
exponents long before that date. The troubadour
Deudes de Prades, in a French poem composed
about the end of the twelfth century, refers to a
treatise on hawking by Henry I., surnamed Beau-
clerc (A.D. 1100-1135). And in another poem on the
same subject in Norman French, which, according
to Sir Henry Ellis, was written in the Abbey of
Reading about the year 1240, the author states
that he took his matter from a book made for or
by the good King Edward—that is, Edward the

222
THE OLDEST BOOK ON FISHING 223

Confessor. Earlier still, namely, in the tenth
century, Archbishop AE lfric’s Cod/oguy, designed to
teach the Anglo-Saxon scholars Latin, includes a
dialogue between a scholar and a falconer, which
gives some curious details of hawking as practised
in Anglo-Saxon times. Thus, in regard to hunt-
ing and hawking, the literature of both subjects
commenced much earlier than that of fishing, and
on all three subjects treatises had been written long
before the Book of St Albans was printed. The
earliest printed book in any language on hawking,
Das Erste Buch, appeared at Augsburg in black
letter about 1472.

The question remains, what is the earliest known
book on angling? Most people will be under the
impression that the answer must be the Book of St
Albans, but it is important to note that the treatise
on fishing formed no part of ¢he first edition, and
therefore Dame Juliana Berners could have had no
hand in it, either as author or compiler.

What are the facts? In 1486 the Boke was first
printed at St Albans by one whose name has not
come down to us, but who is described as ‘‘ some-
time schoolmaster at St Albans.” It is evidently
a school book, designed for the instruction of
youth in the accomplishments of the period, in
which, as he tells us, ‘‘gentylmen and honeste
persones have grete delyte.” The lessons it
contains, and the language in which they are
conveyed, adapted to the intelligence of youth,
show that they were intended to be taught by a
school-dame, in all probability by the wife of the
224 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

schoolmaster who printed the book for her... Thus
we read :—

‘“‘Wheresoevere ye fare by frith or by fell,
My dere chylde take hede how Tristram doth you tell
How many maner beestys of venery ther are.
Lysten to your dame, and she shall you lere.”

The doggerel rhymes, no doubt, were intended
as an aid to memory. This first edition, then,
contained three treatises—the first on hawking, the
second on hunting, the third on the blazing of
arms. None of them was original, but all were
compiled from older manuscripts, which have been
identified. From the colophon to the third treatise
it is clear that it was not original, but was
‘“translatyd and compylyt togedyr at Seynt
Albans.” It was, in fact, translated from the Latin
MS. of Nicolas Upton, De Studio Militari. The
Treatyse of Fysshynge with an Angle formed no
part of the Boke of St Albans, and was not printed
until ten years later (1496) by Wynkyn de Worde,
Caxton’s assistant and successor at the Westminster
press. With this, naturally, Dame Juliana Berners
had nothing whatever to do, and the mistake in
attributing it to her probably arose from finding it
included by Haslewood in the first important
reprint of the book in black letter in 1810, and
supposing from the title that it was a reprint of the
first edition. Haslewood, however, took the second
edition as being more complete with the treatise

1 Haslewood alludes to him as ‘‘the monkish schoolmaster,”

in which case, of course, there could have been no marriage.
But there is no evidence of any kind to warrant the assumption

that he was a monk.
THE OLDEST BOOK ON FISHING 225

on fishing, and he is careful to state in his
commentary on this part of the volume (Lutroduc-
tion, p. 60) that “neither for Juliana Barnes,
the monkish schoolmaster, nor anyone who assisted
in compiling the original Book of St Albans, can
there be consistently advanced a claim of author-
ship in this ‘little pamphlet.’” The last two words
have reference to Wynkyn de Worde’s own
explanation of the reasons which prompted him to
add it for the first time to the treatises previously
printed. He says :—

“And for by cause (z.¢., in order) that this
present treatyse sholde not come to the hondys of
eche ydle persone whyche wolde desire it yf it were
enpryntyd allone by itself and put m a bytyll
plaunfiet, therefore I have compylyd it in a greter
volume of dyverse bokys ... to the entent that
the forsayd ydle persones [who may care nothing
for fishing] sholde not by this meanes utterly
dystroye it.”

The wisdom of such a course is now fully
apparent, and has proved a lasting boon to
anglers.

With regard to the authorship of the Fishing,
we learn from some remarks under the head of
“Carp” that it was a compilation partly from oral
instruction, partly from “ bokes of credence”—that
is, from earlier manuscripts. The writer tells us
that he was ‘‘loth to wryte more than I knowe and
have provyd. But well I wote that the redde
worme and the menow ben good baytys for him
(z.2., the carp) at all tymes, as I have herde saye

P
226 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

of persones credyble, and also found wryten in bokes
of credence.” ?

So that, after all, it was not the earliest work
on fishing, as many suppose, although the earliest
printed treatise on the subject. In 1883 the late
Mr Thomas Satchell, joint author with Mr West-
wood of the invaluable Azb/zotheca Piscatorza, printed
what he called ‘“‘An Older Form of the Zveatyse
of Fysshynge with an Angle, attributed to Dame
Juliana Barnes,” from a manuscript in the possession
of Mr Alfred Denison, and previously in possession
of Haslewood. It is described as ‘‘a fragment of
a manuscript of the earlier part of the fifteenth
century, forming a considerable portion of the little
pamphlet first printed in the Book of St Albans.”
It is incidentally referred to in the ‘ Advertise-
ment” to Pickering’s reprint of the Zveatyse of
fysshynge, published in 1827, as having formerly
belonged to William Herbert. From him it passed
to Brand, and from Brand to George Isted, who
presented it to Haslewood a few months before
he died. Needless to say, it is of the highest
interest and importance to literary anglers. That
it is an independent text (says Mr Satchell) cannot
be doubted, and in this opinion we are supported
by the authority of Professor Skeat, who is in-
clined to assign it an earlier date than 1450.
Though probably an older form of the treatise
printed at Westminster in 1496, it is drawn from
the same original, which, wherever it first came

1 These words occur in an older form of the treatise to be
noticed presently.
THE OLDEST BOOK ON FISHING 227

from, was at that time written in our language.
The close correspondence in many passages forbids
the idea that the two versions were independent
translations from another tongue.

Here, then, we have a treatise on fishing which
was in existence before the first edition of the Book
of St Albans was printed, and yet was not included
in it, being evidently unknown to Dame Juliana
Berners and her printer. As there is no evidence
to show that either of them had any hand in the
productions of the Westminster press, we are forced
to the conclusion that the popular notion which
attributes the treatise of 1496 to Dame Juliana
Berners is a fallacy, and the sooner this is re-
cognised the better. It is not a little surprising
that Mr Satchell did not view the matter in this
light when writing his instructive preface to the
‘older form” above mentioned.

What literary anglers should now endeavour
to do is to discover some of the earlier ‘books of
credence” which were known to the writer of the
Treatise of Fishing. They may still be preserved
amongst the manuscripts in continental libraries,
and should be looked for bound up with tracts on
‘““Venerie,’” amongst which they have possibly
escaped the notice of students more intent on the
literature of other branches of field sports.

Probably few anglers are aware that in 1492, a
small quarto volume on fowling and fishing, written
originally in Flemish, was printed at Antwerp by
Matthias van der Goes. Its extreme rarity may be
judged from the fact that only one copy of the first
228 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

edition is known to exist. But the possessor of it,
Mr Alfred Denison, in 1872 had it translated into
English and printed twenty-five copies only. One
of these it has been my good fortune to see, anda
very curious little volume it is. A small quarto of
two sheets only, the first sheet having no signature ;
the second has “Br” on the first leaf, and a full

 

  
   

Pececleipres
Ser NS

ecque®

PT

s

 

       

 

e ‘ Q, res \‘ ews
NY AAA —* — ‘

AN ANGLER OF THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY.

 

page contains thirty lines. It is adorned with half
a dozen quaint woodcuts, one of which is here
reproduced from a tracing. It begins :-—

“This little book shows how birds may be
caught with the hands. And how fish may be
caught with the hands and also otherwise. And
also at what time of the year it is best for every-

body to fish.”
THE OLDEST BOOK ON FISHING 229

It concludes :—

‘‘And this work was caused to be printed by
Matthias van der Goes.”

In an introduction to the translation, Mr
Denison, quoting Holtrop (Monumens Typo-
graphiques des Pays Bas au XVe Siecle), recalls
the fact that Matthias van der Goes printed at
Antwerp from 1482 to 1491, in which year he
died. His widow married his successor, Godfridus
Bach, a bookbinder, on November 19, 1492, and
the natural conclusion, therefore, seems to be that
the little book was left in type by Van der Goes,
and published soon after his death by Bach.
Writing in 1872 Mr Denison expressed the
opinion that it is the first known work on angling,
since which date I am not aware that anything
earlier has been discovered. It should be noted
that his unique copy is a first edition, but another
edition, without place or date, according to West-
wood and Satchell (pp. 36, 37), is, or was, in the
library of the Duc d’Arenberg in Brussels, while a
third and much later edition is dated 1584. The
very limited number of copies (twenty-five) of the
English translation no doubt accounts for its being
so little known to English anglers.
FISHES TRAPPED BY BLADDERWORT

So long ago as May 1884 the late Professor
Moseley, of Oxford, made known a curious dis-
covery by Mr G. E. Simms, of that city, who found
that the bladder traps of Utricularia vulgaris are
capable of catching newly-hatched fish and killing
them. Mr Simms had brought him for examination
a specimen of this aquatic plant in a glass vessel, in
which there were numerous young Roach recently
hatched from a mass of spawn lying at the bottom.
Several of these small fish were seen to be dead,
held fast in the grasp of the Bladderwort. Mr
Simms then supplied a fresh specimen of the plant
in a vessel with fresh young fish and spawn, and in
about six hours more than a dozen of the fish were
found to be entrapped. Most of them were caught
by the head, which was usually pushed as far into
the bladder as possible till the snout touched its
hinder wall. In that position the two black eyes of
the fish would show out conspicuously through the
sides of the bladder. Less frequently a specimen
was found to be caught by the tip of the snout.
Several, however, were caught by the tip of the
tail, which was more or less engulfed, and one was
observed to be held by the yolk-sac. In three or

four instances a fish had its head held by one
230
FISHES ENTRAPPED Dai

bladder trap, and its tail by another, the body of
the fish forming a connecting link between the two
bladders. This curious circumstance, with fuller
details, formed the subject of an article by Mr
Simms which was published in Mature of July 24,
1884, accompanied by an illustration. Professor
Moseley stated he had not been able to see a fish in
the actual process of being trapped, nor to find one
recently caught and showing signs of life ; all those
found trapped were already dead.

Curiously enough, Darwin, in his account of the
trapping of crustacea and worms by U¢ricudarza,
states that he also had been unable to observe the
actual process of trapping, although Mrs Treat, of
New Jersey, had often witnessed it. Professor
Moseley thought that the mechanism by which the
small fish became so deeply imbedded was to be
explained by the fact, observed by Darwin, that
the longer of the two pairs of projections composing
the quadrifid processes by which the bladders of
the U¢ricudarza are lined project obliquely inwards,
and towards the posterior end of the bladder.
These oblique processes, set all towards the hinder
end of the bladder, look as if they must act together
with the spring valves of the mouth of the bladder
in utilising each fresh struggle of the capture for
the purpose of pushing it further and further in-
wards. Darwin had failed to detect any digestive
process in Utricularia, and on cutting open longi-
tudinally some of the bladders containing the heads
and foreparts of fishes, Moseley found the tissues of
the fish in a more or less slimy deliquescent con-
232 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

dition, which he attributed simply to decomposition.
The quadrifid processses were bathed in this slimy
animal matter, but although the processes themselves
seemed to contain abundance of fine granular
matter, possibly the result of absorption, the quantity
of surrounding animal matter rendered the observa-
tion uncertain.

Ata meeting of the Queckett Microscopical Club,
held on February 20, 1903, a letter was read from
Mr E. Ernest Green of the Paradenyia Gardens,
Ceylon, stating that, although he had no acquaint-
ance with the British species of Utricularia, he
was quite sure that a small species of this plant
found in Ceylon did capture and hold fish in the way
described. Mr Green had witnessed the process in
an aquarium of his own, and although the bladders
of the Ceylonese plant are barely one-sixteenth of
an inch in length, he had on several occasions seen
young fish nearly an inch long securely held by
their tails in these tiny but most effective traps.

Utricularia vulgaris, like other species of the
genus (major, minor, and neglecta), is very local,
growing in isolated patches in ponds and sluggish
ditches, where coarse fish usually deposit their ova.
This renders it as great an enemy to the small fry
as wildfow] and otters are to the larger fish in streams
and rivers, because for a considerable time after
they emerge from the egg the young fish remain in
the shallow water, and during this time great
numbers of them must be killed by the vesicles of
Utricularia.

Mr Simms observed that, except in cases where
FISHES ENTRAPPED 233

the plant had been displaced by the action of the
wind, he always found it growing on the shadiest
side of a pond, and almost invariably hidden by
other aquatic vegetation. From this he inferred
that excess of light was prejudicial to the plant, and
he remarked that if when kept in an aquarium it is
exposed to the full glare of the daylight the valves
seemed to lose their elasticity, and the vesicles be-
come detached from the stem and drop off.

A knowledge of these facts may be useful to
pisciculturists, who perhaps may not hitherto have
suspected so curious a cause of mortality amongst

young fry.
FISH-EATING BATS

By recent -systematists Bats are divided into two
great groups, generally regarded as sub-orders,
namely, the Megachiroptera, or large bats, chiefly
fruit-eaters, and the MWecrochiroptera, or small bats,
most of which are insectivorous, but some of which
are known to eat fruit.

In the former group, out of some seventy species.
recognised as distinct, more than one-half belong
to the genus Ptervopus, of which examples may
always be seen in the Zoological Gardens. They
are characterised by a long, fox-like face (whence
the name “‘ flying fox”), the ears simple and pointed
or very slightly rounded, the margins of the ear
meeting at the base, so as to form a circle, the nose
without any leaf-like appendages, the tail very
short or wanting, the interfemoral membrane,
which in our common bats incloses the tail,
reduced to very small dimensions, while the long
thumb, and in most cases the first finger also, is
armed with a strong claw. Finally, the molar
teeth have flattened crowns, with a central groove
in the direction of the length of the jaw.

In the other sub-orders of bats, which contains
a much larger number of species (roughly speaking
about 330 different kinds have been described)

234
FISH-EATING BATS 235

the majority are characterised by a shorter muzzle;
the margins of the ear, instead of meeting at the
base, are inserted at a little distance apart, and
have a membranous lobe springing from near their
base, and the tragus, or anterior lobe of the ear,
largely developed. Many have curious leaf-like
appendages on the nose (as in the case of our
British Horseshoe Bats), the tail usually long, with
an expansive interfemoral membrane, and no claw
upon the index finger. The molar teeth have sharp
tubercles, separated by transverse furrows, pro-
ducing a pattern like a W on each tooth.

These are the characteristics which, roughly
speaking, enable us to decide offhand to which of
the two great sub-orders any particular species of
bat may belong; and although, as a general
proposition, it may be asserted that the
Megachiroptera are frugivorous, and the Mcro-
chiroptera insectivorous, the observations of
naturalists in different parts of the world go to
prove that there are exceptions to the rule, and
that with certain species of both groups the food
is, at least occasionally, of a mixed character, the
result probably of a gradual adaptation of habits to
altered conditions of life.

We have a good illustration of this in Moctzlo
leporinus, a bat which is widely distributed in
Central and South America and the West Indies,
and which, although stated by a good authority to
be a member of the fruit-eating group of bats,
belongs, in fact, to the insectivorous sub-order, as
appears by the characteristic dentition and other
236 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

peculiarities above referred to. Linnzeus described
it as “victitans fructibus arborum,” and in the
intestines of specimens received from British
Guiana Mr G. E. Dobson found some seeds of
fruit, apparently Morus ¢ténctoria. On the other
hand, Von Tschudi, writing of its habits as observed
in Peru, remarked that it lives in hollow trees and
‘‘feeds upon beetles, which we always found in
their stomachs.” Its insectivorous habits have
also been noted in Brazil by Prince Maximilian
Wied Neuwied, and in Jamacia by the late P. H.
Gosse, who, having procured some live specimens
from a hollow cotton tree, found that they fed
eagerly on cockroaches. He says :—

“T presented to one a large cockroach, which
he seized greedily and munched up, moving the
jaws only vertically. The eating was attended
with a loud and very harsh crunching of the teeth,
not produced by crushing the horny parts of the
insect, for it was equally perceptible when
munching a bit of soft flesh, The jaws moved
rapidly, but yet the mastication was a long opera-
tion, for it appeared to me to be performed almost
wholly by the canines. As the insect was pro-
gressively masticated, portions were allowed to fall
into the cheek pouches (the one being pretty well
filled before the other was used), which when full
hung down on each side of the lower jaw, like
distended bags, displaying a warted surface. When
the whole of one cockroach had been masticated,
and deposited in the pouches, it would take another,
which was gradually disposed of in the same recep-
FISH-EATING BATS 237

tacles ; then after a few moments’ intermission, by
a contortion of the jaw, aided by the motion of the
muscles of the pouch, a portion was returned to
the mouth and again masticated. This was repeated
till all was swallowed, and the pouches appeared
empty and contracted up out of sight.”

A more curious observation in regard to this
same species of bat was made by the late Mr
Fraser in Ecuador. He watched it skimming the
bank of the river at Esmeraldas, every now and
then making a dash along and actually striking the
water, catching the minute shrimps as they passed
up stream. The specimens of this bat which he
secured were found to havea very offensive fishy
smell.

But the most remarkable statement respecting
the food and habits of Moctzlio leporinus comes to
us from Trinidad, where it is asserted that this
species is common in caves upon the islands of the
Bocas (or Straits), and preys upon the small fry of
fish, which it catches by dashing down suddenly on
the appearance of a shoal upon the surface of the
water. The story is not new, having been told by
the late Charles Kingsley many years ago; but,
although he saw the bats in question dashing down
to the water at intervals, he missed the opportunity
of satisfying himself of the object of their
manceuvres, and it is only lately that conclusive
proof has been obtained of the habits attributed to
them by residents in Trinidad.

In his delightful volume, 4¢ Last: a Chistmas tn
the West Indies, which was published in 1871, and
238 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

which is only marred by the want of an index, the
author says :—

‘Early in January I started on an expedition to
the islands of the Bocas. Our object was two-
fold: to see tropical coast scenery and to get, if
possible, some Guacharo birds (pronounced
Huacharo), known also in the West Indies as
Diablotin, and to ornithologists more familiarly as
the oil bird (Steatornis caripensts). Our chance
of getting them depended on the sea being calm
outside the Bocas as well as inside (i., p. 181). The
first islands which we made—the Five Islands as
they are called—are curious enough. Isolated
remnants of limestone, the biggest perhaps 100
yards long by too feet high, channelled and honey-
combed into strange shapes by rain and waves (i.,
p. 182). As it grew dark, dark things came trooping
over the sea, by twos and threes, then twenty at a
time, all passed us towards a cave near by. Birds
we fancied them at first, of the colour and size of
starlings; but they proved to be bats, and bats too
which have the reputation of catching fish. So
goes the tale, believed by some who see them
continually and have a keen eye for nature, and
who say that the bat sweeps the fish up off the top
of the water with the scoop-like membrane of his
hindlegs and tail. For this last fact I will not
vouch, but I am assured that fish scales were found
after I left the island in the stomachs of these bats,
and that of the fact of their picking up small fish
there can be no doubt. You could not, says a
friend, be out at night in a boat and hear their
FISH-EATING BATS 239

continued swish, swish, in the water without
believing it. Ifso, the habit is a quaint change of
nature in them, for they belong, I am assured by
my friend Professor Newton, not to the insect-
eating but to the fruit-eating family of bats,? which
in the West as in the East Indies may be seen at
night hovering round the mango trees and destroy-
ing much more fruit than they eat.”

The story was revived in 7he Fvedd of July 14,
1888, by Dr G. H. Kingsley, who had also visited
Trinidad during the cruise of the Morthuméria,
and who, like his brother, had watched the move-
ments of the bats in question, and listened to the
statements of the natives concerning them. With
a praiseworthy desire to ascertain the truth of the
alleged fishing propensities, he floated about on
many a hot evening to see how it was done; but
though he was close to them—close enough to be
nauseated by their detestable odour—he could
never quite make up his mind on the subject. On
the whole, he was inclined to accept the native idea
that they scoop them off the surface with the
interfemoral membrane; and he concludes:
‘‘ However it was done, they certainly did catch
fish, and eat them, for I found fish scales and
bones in their stomachs, and had microscopical
slides prepared to prove it.”

Here, at last, was something definite to go
upon; and a letter addressed to Dr Kingsley

1 This is a misapprehension, based possibly on what has been
stated by Linnzeus in regard to its food, as already quoted.
There are no representatives of the fruit-eating Preropodide in
America.
240 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

speedily procured for me a sight of a stuffed speci-
men of the bat (whose species, until then, had not
been named) and a slide containing a small portion
of the contents of the stomach. These I exhibited
at a meeting of the Linnean Society on November 15,
1888, and briefly called attention to the facts of the
case. But, alas! the microscope revealed nothing
that, in the eyes of such experts as Dr Giinther and
Dr F. Day, could be stated positively to appertain
to fish; and it seemed more likely that certain
minute iridiscent particles, which were at first
supposed by Dr Kingsley to be fragments of fish
scales, were portions of the shining wing-cases of
coleopterous insects.

There seemed nothing for it, therefore, but to
procure some freshly killed specimens of this bat in
alcohol, and to examine carefully the nature of the
entire contents of the stomachs. This, through the
kindness of His Excellency Sir William Robinson,
the Governor of Trinidad, I was enabled to do ; for,
acting upon his instructions, Professor M‘Carthy,
of the Government Laboratory at St Anne’s, was
good enough to forward to me three separate con-
signments of specimens, together with some micro-
scopical slides of his own preparation, the examina-
tion of which has resulted in placing beyond all
doubt the fact that in Trinidad Moctzlio leporinus
does habitually prey upon small fish. These
specimens were exhibited by me at a meeting of
the Linnean Society on February 21, 1889. Inthree
separate reports which accompanied the specimens
sent to me at intervals during the spring of that
FISH-EATING BATS 241

year, Professor M‘Carthy detailed the result of his
own observations of the living animals, and his
examination of some of the specimens he procured.
The following extracts are especially interesting :—

‘“On December 29 I proceeded to Monos, and at
9 p.m. visited a cave on the east side of the island

   
 

       

CCAM fF AM ry
ga) i h HE S

HEAD OF NOCTILIO LEPORINUS.
(Twice the Natural Size.)

on the first Boca. This cave is in a soft shale
formation, and the top of the opening is about 7 feet
from the water at full tide. The bats were then in
an active state, and the majority appeared to be
flying homewards. There were few fish near the
surface of the water, and comparatively little local
fishing appeared to be going on. An occasional
‘gwish’ now and again far out proved that the bats
Q
242 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

were trying to secure their prey. Five homeward-
bound specimens were secured in the cave about
twelve yards from the mouth. The stomach of one
specimen, opened within half an hour, contained
much fish in a finely divided and partially digested
state... . On the morning of the 31st I visited
the cave from which the specimens were procured
at 3.a.m., and found that the bats had apparently
forgotten the previous disturbance. They came
flying in in dozens, and two specimens were secured.
Both contained considerable quantities of fish. . . .
I have opened several other specimens of the bats,
and in the majority of cases fish scales were found ;
but the stomachs of two were perfectly empty.
This might be attributed to the absence of the
desired fish in the locality ” [or to the fact that they
were shot before they had had time to catch any].

Referring to the mode in which the bats capture
the fish, Professor M‘Carthy says :—

“My opinion, from what I have ascertained
{though I have not actually seex the operation, I
have eard it) is, that the bats skim the surface,
peering at the same time into the water below. As
soon as fish are observed the interfemoral membrane
is let down, and occasions the ‘swish’ so frequently
heard. At this time the fish is secured by the claws
immersed in the water, and is possibly raised with
the assistance of the membrane, and so held until
the mouth is reached down below the body, and the
fry devoured. I am inclined to attach more import-
ance to the use of the membrane as a means of
coming to a sudden stop, than as a lifting medium,
FISH-EATING BATS 243

which may possibly be done or assisted by the
wings. It is believed that the fish are sometimes
lifted out by the membrane alone being employed
as an impervious net.”

In a subsequent report he says :—

“On January 15 I went in an open boat by
Carenage to the Five Islands, and crossed to Point
Gourd. ... I remained the
night in the locality, and ob-
served bats continually. Some
partially dived for fish within
fifteen yards of the boat, but
this was before we commenced
to try and shoot them. I see Foor or yoorm terormvs.
no reason to change the opinion celia
expressed in my previous report respecting the
manner in which the fish is secured, and subse-
quently disposed of. There is no doubt but that
the immersion of the interfemoral membrane and
the securing of the fish are simultaneous move-
ments.”

After some further remarks, he concludes :—

“A microscopic examination of some of the
excrement, collected in the caves frequented by
these bats, proved the presence of chitin from a
beetle’s leg and scales from the wing of a butterfly.
This would tend to show that when fish food is
scarce (or unprocurable) the bats can accommodate
themselves to insect food.”

After this circumstantial account by Professor
M ‘Carthy, confirmatory as it is of all that had been
previously stated by Messrs Kingsley, it is impossible

 
244 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

to withhold credence to this very curious story ; but
if further testimony be needed, I have only to add
that the contents of the stomachs which I removed
fromthe specimens received from Professor M‘Carthy
were carefully examined by Professor Stewart, of the
Royal College of Surgeons, who recognised fish
scales and fin rays, while one of the prepared slides
shows very distinctly the lower jaw with the teeth
of some small fish. The late Professor G. B. Howes
reported that, of two specimens examined by him,
the stomach and intestine of one were empty, and
that the intestine of the other yielded muscular
fibre, and some finely divided organic matter. The
feeces were remarkable for their oily nature, the
whole field of the microscope being studded with
oil globules in varying stages of emulsification.
The muscular fibre was little digested, and laden
with fat in the manner well known for fishes.

That the dentition of Moctzlio leporinus is not
unsuited to a fish diet may be inferred from the
figure here given of the skull, with distended jaws,
drawn twice the natural size in order to exhibit the
teeth more clearly, while it may well be supposed
that a bat which could so easily crunch up cock-
roaches, as observed by Mr Gosse, would find no-
difficulty in disposing of the softer bodies of delicate
fish fry.

The dental formula, as may be inferred from
the sketch, is :—

L— 1

Incisors, * ; canines,
2 I—I

 

; premolars, —" ; molars, 3—3.
2—2 oa

The stomach, which is littlhe more than a sac-
FISH-EATING BATS 245

like distention of the intestine, would certainly be
capable of receiving without injury the finely
comminuted portions of fish swallowed after the
elaborate process of mastication described by Mr
Gosse. The large and powerful hind foot above
figured might well perform the office attributed to
it in seizing the fish, either with or without the
assistance of the inter-
femoral membrane. To
give some idea of the
size of this Bat, it may
be observed that the
length, from tip of
nose to the end of the
extended interfemoral
membrane, is 54 in.;
the length of head and SKULL OF NOCTILIO LEPORINUS.
body only, 4t in.; length (Twice the Natural Size.)

of fore-arm, 34 in.; the hind foot, 1 in.; and the
expanse of wing, 16in. The general colour | should
describe as orange tawny. In conclusion, it may
be remarked that octzlio leporinus is not the only
species of bat which has been reported to catch
fish. So long ago as 1863 Dr J. Shortt, in a
communication to the Zoological Society, dated
“‘Chingleput, June 12, 1863,” reported his having
witnessed on two cccasions at Conleeveram during
the previous April the fishing propensities of the
Pteropus of India, which he named P. edulis,
but which was doubtless P. medius, the only
species of this genus which is known to inhabit the
peninsula of India.

   
246 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

On the occasion referred to, he says (Proc.
Zool. Soc., 1863, p. 439): “I got my assistant, Mr
Watson, to bring his gun, and shoot some, so that
I might satisfy myself of the identity of these
animals. Mr Watson shot some two or three,
whilst in the act of seizing (as he supposed) their
finny prey, and on examination I found them to
be actually ‘ flying foxes.’ During a second visit
on the 5th and 6th of June, I observed the same
thing occur again.”

Blanford, who has figured the skull of Pteropus
medius,* agrees with Jerdon in thinking that the
habit with this species of skimming over water in
the evening has been mistaken for fishing. He has
no doubt it is for the purpose of sipping the water,
and this is also the opinion of Col. Tickell, who has
published a good account of its habits in the third
volume of the Calcutta Journal of Natural History.
This peculiarity is not confined to the Preropodide.
I have observed it in some of our British Bats.

1 Fauna of British India (Mammals), p. 256.
NATURE STUDIES IN JAPANESE ART

Ir is impossible to examine the work of Japanese
artists without being struck by the wonderful
appreciation of Nature which they everywhere
display. No one who possesses any knowledge of
animals or plants can have failed to remark how
truthfully a great variety of forms are depicted, and
how skilfully the native artist borrows from Nature
all that is most expressive in action, elegant in
outline, and beautiful in colour. Hence in the
representation of flowers, foliage, and birds, for
decorative purposes, the Japanese have no rivals.

The flowers most commonly met with in
Japanese art are the Chrysanthemum, Peony,
Wistaria, Iris, Lily, Hydrangea, Carnation,
Convolvulus, and Water-lily; but several other
flowers indigenous to Japan are used for ornamen-
tation in combination with the above. The
Hydrangea, Convolvulus, and Water-lily are very
often depicted on works of lacquer and porcelain,
the Convolvulus, from its creeping habit, being an
especial favourite in free design.

The trees most frequently met with are the
Kiri (Paulownia imperialts, Siebold), Plum, Fir,
and Palm, the flowers of the Plum being special
favourites in ornamentation. Reeds, creeping

247
248 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

plants, and grasses of all descriptions are favourites
with the Japanese artist ; and in the first class the
stately Bamboo holds the most prominent position,
on account of its almost universal utility and the
symbolic value attached to it; for, like the Fir, it
is regarded as the symbol of longevity on account
of its generally-supposed long existence. Kempfer
was informed that it will grow for centuries, and,
in support of that statement, was shown specimens
which had reached the most extraordinary dimen-
sions,

Next to vegetation, the artists of Japan are
most skilled in the representation of birds; and
they appear to have an equal love for depicting
them either alone or in combination with foliage.
The natural habits of birds supply an inexhaustible
source of study, and one may observe everywhere
in the work of these artists how painstaking they
are in its prosecution, by the care and accuracy
with which characteristic positions are rendered.
It is chiefly in their pottery, lacquer, illustrated
books, and original drawings that we find the best
specimens of their skill in this department, although
some choice examples are to be met with in metal
work and in ivory carvings. Let the material,
however, be what it may, wherever there is a bird
depicted there is room for study, and cause for
admiration.

The birds most frequently represented, and
consequently the most carefully studied by Japanese
artists, are the Crane, tame and wild ducks, Wild-
goose, Peacock, Pheasant, Raven, Goshawk,
 

 

 

A JAPANESE CRANE,
250 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Falcon, ordinary domestic fowls, and several of the
smaller birds common to the country.

The Crane (Zsuvu), according to Kempfer, is.
the chief of the wild birds in Japan, and has the
peculiar Imperial privilege that nobody can shoot
it without an express order from the Emperor, and
only for the Emperor’s own pleasure or use. It is
held in a sort of semi-veneration by all classes of
the community in Japan, and is, on account of its
supposed long life, very generally accepted as an
emblem of longevity. For these reasons it is one
of the greatest favourites with the artists of the
country, and is introduced in ornamentation
throughout the entire range of their arts. It is
treated in countless ways; it is, indeed, impossible
to imagine any position the living bird could
assume which is not depicted by the Japanese
artist; and it would be difficult to find anything
more artistic, from a decorative point of view, than
their manner of treating it in these varied positions.
A remarkable fact in connection with the Crane is
that the Japanese avoid representing it as dead.
Messrs Audsley and Bowes, in their beautiful work,
The Keramic Art of Japan, state that, during
many years’ study of Japanese art work, they do
not remember to have once seen a representation
of a dead Crane. This, they observe, may be
satisfactorily accounted for by the symbolic value
attached to the bird, for a dead Crane would
scarcely be an expressive emblem of longevity.
In lacquer work Cranes are very often introduced
in the ornamentation, and are exquisitely manipu-
STUDIES IN JAPANESE ART 251

lated in gold and coloured lacquers, or carved in
ivory or mother-of-pearl, and attached to the
surface.’ In metal work also this bird is frequently
met with either cast in bronze, or wrought in the
precious metals, relieved in the coloured portions
with other metals or alloys. Again, we may often
see Cranes very skilfully embroidered in fine
twisted silk, with every important feather very
beautifully and accurately wrought. When the
birds are drawn in upward flight, they are usually
surrounded with conventional clouds, giving the
idea of space ; when they are shown in downward
flight, a few tops of trees appear at the bottom
of the picture, graphically indicating their near
approach to earth.

A law existed in Japan, and is believed to be
still observed, that no firearms should be used
within a radius of thirty miles from the Imperial
palace. This encouraged to a great extent the
sport of falconry, and consequently the taste for
depicting its scenes. Captain Blakiston, who has
paid much attention to the birds of Japan, states
that the Goshawk is the bird most used by the

1 One of the most striking examples of this kind of work I
saw in the Japanese Court at the Paris Exhibition of 1889. It
was a very beautiful folding screen of lacquer inlaid with ivory
and mother-of-pearl, on which was a spirited representation of
crane-hawking with white falcons. On one side a Crane, struck
down by a Falcon, was lying with extended wings in the act of
being seized by the hawk. The former bird was of ivory in alto-
relief, the latter of mother-of-pearl. The workmanship was
marvellous; every one of the primary feathers, quill and web,
being exquisitely carved. Indeed I have never seen anything
of the kind at all comparable to the extended left wing of that
Crane.
252 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Japanese for hawking—a sport which was much
practised in feudal times, but is little kept up now.
To the cause of this decline I have adverted in an
article on ‘“‘ Hawking in Japan,” which appeared in
The Field of October 18, 1879.

The screens which the Japanese so commonly
use in their dwellings as temporary partitions, like
the notable example above-mentioned, and their
indispensable fans, are frequently painted with
sporting scenes ; while many books entirely devoted
to falconry are printed, in which quaint yet charm-
ing woodcuts are to be found. Both in hand-
paintings and woodcuts we find repeated evidence
of skill in bird drawing, with every conceivable
position and action of the hawk and its quarry
delineated.

Falcons (Zaka) and Eagles ( Washz), according to
Messrs Audsley and Bowes, do not appear on works
of ceramic art or lacquer so frequently as Cranes
and some other birds, but when they are represented,
they quite sustain the credit of the Japanese artist.

Pheasants (477z) are great favourites, and are
very often introduced in ornamentation. Ducks of
several kinds are portrayed, an especial favourite
for its beautiful colours being the Mandarin Duck
(Osht kamo). The drake and duck of this remarkable
species, when represented together, are accepted by
the Japanese as the emblem of conjugal felicity.
The Wigeon, which is very common in Japan in
winter, we may often see well depicted.

The Peacock (Awjaku) appears as a decoration
in all materials, and is commonly portrayed on
STUDIES IN JAPANESE ART 253

pottery and porcelain, being drawn in blue by the
Hizen artists, and in brilliant colours by those of
Satsuma. The Peacock is not a native of Japan,
but of India, whence it was transported eastward
into China, and eventually into Japan.t

The Wild-goose (Gaz) is very skilfully treated
by Japanese artists, and, like the Crane, is depicted
in a variety of attitudes. Representations of
ordinary domestic fowls are frequently to be met
with, and are usually drawn with great accuracy.
Cocks are commonly kept in Temple grounds,
where they are carefully attended to by the priests
and others, because they foretell changes in the
weather, and by the regularity of their crowing
mark the passage of time. This no doubt, as
suggested by Messrs Audsley and Bowes, accounts
for the frequent representation of the cock perched
on the top of a Temple drum.

These are some of the more important birds
commonly to be met with in Japanese works of
art. Amongst the smaller birds easily identified
are the Coal Titmouse, the Long-tailed Titmouse,
the Redstart (Audzczlla aurorea, Pallas), the Tree
Sparrow (Passer montanus, Linn.), which is the
domestic sparrow of Japan and China, the sexes
being alike in plumage; and the Bullfinch
(Pyrrhula orientalis, Temm. and Schleg.), which is
much valued by the Japanese asa cage-bird. With
such fidelity to nature are all these depicted, that
there is no mistaking the species intended.

1See the article “Peacock” in Hehn’s Wanderings of Plants
and Animals from their first home, 1885, p. 263.
 

 

 

THE TREE SPARROW.
STUDIES IN JAPANESE ART 255

Of all natural objects quadrupeds are less fre-
quently represented. This is probably due to the
fact that wild animals are not numerous in Japan,
and the artists have seldom any favourable op-
portunities for actual study of them from the life.
Of all quadrupeds, perhaps the Horse is most
frequently depicted, and often with great skill and
knowledge of foreshortening. Other animals re-
presented with much artistic power in carvings and
metal work are Oxen, Deer, Bears, Dogs, Cats,
and Rats; while in humorous ivory carvings no
animal is so frequently met with as the Monkey or
Ape, which especially lends itself to the treatment
of the grotesque.

Of Fishes and Crustacea the Japanese seas yield
a great variety, many of them remarkable for their
brilliant colouring ; and these are everywhere to
be met with in Japanese art work, depicted with
considerable skill. A favourite subject is a Carp
in the act of ascending a waterfall ; and in grotesque
carvings the Octopus, or Devil-fish, is often very
cleverly introduced. Shells are great favourites in
ornamentation, particularly in that of lacquer work,
where, executed in richly raised gold and tinted
lacs, they produce very pleasing effects. Coral
and seaweed are likewise introduced, sometimes
along with shells, at other times alone, but always
with marked success,

Both Reptiles and Insects are pressed into
the service of the artificer, and are truthfully re-
presented wherever they are introduced. Insects,
indeed, are almost as frequently figured as birds
 

 

 

 

 

 

A JAPANESE DRAGONFLY.
STUDIES IN JAPANESE ART 257

and fishes. They are wrought in coloured materials
upon such objects as ivory boxes, fan handles,
buttons, and the like, carved with the utmost
fidelity in ne¢swke, sculptured and inlaid in bronzes,
painted on fans, screens, and all articles of porce-
lain, faience, and lacquer.

I should like to have been able to give here the
figure of a beautiful bronze in my possession of an
Eagle with outstretched wings, by a Japanese artist.
The modeller had evidently made a study from
Nature, and the fidelity with which the extended
wing feathers have been copied in metal is very
remarkable.

There is perhaps nothing which astonishes the
student of Japanese art so much as the immense
variety which it presents in the treatment of natural
objects. This, say the authors of the work above
quoted, is to be accounted for by the fact that each
work is the result of individual genius. Manu-
factories, in our sense of the word, may be said to
have been unknown in the best days of the empire ;
each and every artist or artisan worked out his own
inspirations according to his own ideas, and in his
own way. Hence it is that we find in almost every
thing which has come from Japan so much variety
and originality.
BIRDS AND LIGHTHOUSES

A SINGULAR incident of bird life, of which most
people have read, but few perhaps have personally
witnessed, is the attraction which lighthouses
present to many species of migratory birds when
passing to and fro upon their periodical migrations.
Those whose business and occupation it is to dwell
in the lighthouses and tend the lamps to save our
vessels from destruction, tell us that at certain
seasons of the year vast flocks of birds are seen
making for the land, and numbers of them, impelled
by some strange infatuation, dash wildly against
the lantern, and often perish from the concussion.
Out in the North Sea, Heligoland lies right in
the track of all the migratory birds which pass to and
from the east and north-east of Europe. This, to
ornithologists, is a famous post of observation ;
and through the agency of an excellent naturalist
resident there, Herr Gatke, some curious statistics
on migration have been collected. Mr H. Seebohm,
who made a short stay on this island, has graphically
described what he witnessed on visiting the light-
house there one night in October, just as the
autumnal migration had commenced. He says :—
“At half-past twelve I was awoke with the news

that the migration had already begun. Hastily
258
BIRDS AND LIGHTHOUSES 259

dressing myself, I at once made for the lighthouse.
The night was almost pitch dark, but the town was
all astir. In every street men, with long lanterns,
and a sort of angler’s landing-net, were making for
the lighthouse. Arrived there, an intensely inter-
esting sight presented itself.

‘The whole of the zone of light, within range of
the mirrors, was alive with birds coming and going.
Nothing else was visible in the darkness of the
night but the lantern of the lighthouse vignetted in
a drifting sea of birds. From the darkness in the
east clouds of birds were continually emerging in
an uninterrupted stream ; a few swerved from their
course, fluttered for a moment as if dazzled by the
light, and then gradually vanished with the rest
inthe western gloom. Occasionally a bird wheeled
round the lighthouse, and then passed on; and
occasionally one fluttered against the glass, like a
moth against a lamp, tried to perch on the wire-
netting, and was caught by the lighthouse man.

I should be afraid to hazard a guess as to the
hundreds of thousands that must have passed in a
couple of hours; but the stray birds, which the
lighthouse men succeeded in securing, amounted to
nearly three hundred. The scene from the balcony
of the lighthouse was equally interesting ; in every
direction birds were flying like a swarm of bees,
and every few seconds one flew against the glass.
All the birds seemed to be flying uf wud, and it
was only on the lee side that any were caught ;
they were nearly all Skylarks. Inthe heap captured
was one Redstart and one Reed Bunting. The air
260 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

was filled with the warbling cry of the Larks ; now
and then a Thrush was heard; and once a Heron
screamed as it passed by. The night was starless,
and the town was invisible; but the island looked
like the outskirts of a gas-lighted city, being
sprinkled over with brilliant lanterns. Many of
the Larks alighted on the ground to rest, and
allowed the Heligolanders to pass their nets over
them. About 3 a.m. a heavy thunderstorm came
on, with deluges of rain ; a few breaks in the clouds
revealed the stars, and the migration came to an
end, or continued above the range of our vision.” *
In giving similar testimony to the effect so
graphically described by Mr Seebohm, the light-
house-keepers on our own shores confirm what has
been known almost since the world began (for do
we not read in Scripture that birds ‘have their
appointed seasons” ?) and state that the coming and
going of certain species at particular periods of the
year may be looked for and observed with singular
regularity. This remarkable habit is termed
‘ migration,” and notwithstanding that few natural
phenomena are more familiar, none perhaps still
remains so shrouded in mystery. The migration
of birds has attracted the attention of observers in
all ages and of all nations, yet few questions in
ornithology are more difficult of solution than the
problem ‘‘Why and how do birds migrate?”
what innate force impels them seasonally in a
particular direction? and how do they find their
way? Before attempting to suggest answers to
1 Siberia in Europe, p. 256.
eI
=
eS
a
Z
5
=
a
<
a
o
A
a
%,
5
a
RQ
5
°
iss
a
ir
o
is
4
<a]
q
aH

 
262 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

these questions, it will be well to state a few facts;
and I will presently endeavour to explain the nature
of the connection between birds and lighthouses,
and show what important assistance has been given
towards a solution of the problems concerning
migration through the instrumentality of those who
daily and nightly keep watch along the shore.

The true ‘‘home” of a bird is undoubtedly the
country, or district, in which it makes its nest and
rears its young. Some species seldom or never
quit their homes, and are termed “residents” ;
others do so periodically, and are termed ‘“‘ migrants”
or “birds of passage.” The latter are commonly
divided into three classes: ““summer migrants,”
‘winter migrants,” and “birds of double passage,”
or those which visit us in spring or autumn. The
“summer migrants” are those which come to us
from the south in spring, pass the summer with us,
bring up their young here, and depart southward
again at the approach of winter. Familiar examples
of these are the Hobby, Red-backed Shrike, Fly-
catcher, Redstart, Wheatear, Reed Warbler,
Nightingale, Blackcap, Garden Warbler, White-
throat, Willow Wren, Yellow Wagtail, Tree Pipit,
Woodlark, Wryneck, Cuckoo, Swallow, Swift,
Nightjar, Turtle Dove, Stone Curlew, Common
Sandpiper, Landrail, Garganey, Puffin, Razorbill,
Kittiwake, and several species of Tern.

The ‘winter migrants” are those which, having
reared their young in latitudes north of the British
Islands move southward about the same time that
our ‘‘ summer migrants ” are travelling in the same
BIRDS AND LIGHTHOUSES 263

direction, but stop short (many of them) at the
English Channel, and make this country their winter
quarters. Familiar examples of these are the Merlin,
Short-eared Owl, Grey Shrike, Fieldfare, Redwing,
Shore-lark, Snow Bunting, Waxwing, Crossbill,
Grey Crow, Golden Plover, Woodcock, Snipe, Jack
Snipe, Bittern, and many Ducks, Geese, and Swans.

The ‘birds of double passage” are those which
come up from the south in the spring with our
“summer migrants,” but, instead of remaining
here with them to rear their young, pass on
to breeding quarters further north or north-east,
whence they return in autumn with our “winter
migrants ’—not to stay here, as a rule, but to pass
still further south for the winter.

Formerly it was a matter of mere conjecture
where Swallows passed the winter, some people
asserting that they did not leave this country at
all, but hibernated in hollow trees and cliffs ; while
others even went so far as to state that they did
so under water, a notion evidently founded on
incomplete observation of the bird’s habits. Their
attachment to the neighbourhood of water at all
times is noticeable. They find plenty of insect food
there. Their being there at roosting-time may be
accounted for by the circumstance that reeds and
willow branches not only afford them most con-
venient perches, but enable them to crowd close
together, and so secure greater warmth to individuals
than they could possibly enjoy if each roosted upon
a separate twig in trees or shrubs of different growth.
Superficial observers, seeing a number of Swallows
264 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

at dusk dash down towards the water and disappear,
gravely asserted that they had seen them go under
water. And this erroneous idea seemed to them to
be confirmed by the discovery of the skeletons of
Swallows in the mud at the bottom of pools, when
the water had been drawn off for the purpose of
cleaning out the pond. These skeletons are merely
the remains of Swallows of too venturesome flight,
which, having skimmed too close to the surface,
have got their plumage saturated, and perished in
their struggles to rise again. The fact that certain
mammals, like the Dormouse, pass the winter ina
lethargic state no doubt lent some colour to the
suggestion that possibly Swallows did the same;
and even now the possibility of hibernation amongst
birds is not altogether denied. But the alleged
evidence on the subject is practically ignored, for
the reason that our present knowledge of their
seasonal movements precludes the necessity for any
such theory to account for their disappearance in
cold weather.

It may be said that we now know with tolerable
certainty the winter haunts of all our summer
visitors. To take the Chimney Swallow as a
familiar instance. This bird, roughly speaking,
spends six months of the year in the British
Islands, that is to say, from April to October.
Between these two months it is found generally
distributed throughout Europe, going up through
Lapland, Norway and Sweden as far north as Ice-
land and Novaya Zemlia, and penetrating even into
Siberia and Amurland.
BIRDS AND LIGHTHOUSES 265

In the countries bordering the Mediterranean it
is especially abundant at the periods of migration
in spring and autumn. Mr C. A. Wright, of Malta,
observed it arriving there in great numbers from
the south early in March; and again, on its return
southwards in autumn, it is common over the whole
island until October. In Spain Mr Howard
Saunders detected it as early as February making
its way north. As an instance of how these delicate
birds at times get blown out of their course by
adverse winds, it may be remarked that Prince
Charles Bonaparte saw Swallows and Martins at
sea 500 miles from Portugal and 400 miles off the
coast of Africa. The late Mr Osbert Salvin saw
Swallows come on board the ship he was in when
180 miles north-west of the Azores.

South of the Mediterranean Swallows may be
seen on the Senegal River and at Sierra Leone all
the year round, although less numerous there from
June to September; and on the west coast they
appear to go as far south as the island of St
Thomas on the Equator, where they have been
observed in January and February.

All along the north coast of Africa, through
Morocco, Algeria, Tripoli, and Egypt, into Nubia,
Swallows are seen throughout the winter months,
and pass down the east coast through Abyssinia,
Zanzibar, and Natal to the Cape Colony, where
they are regular winter visitants. The late Mr
Edgar Layard, when sailing from New Zealand to
the Cape, saw a Swallow and a Sand Martin flying
round the ship for some time on November 28,
266 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the vessel being then about 290 miles from the
Cape.

Passing eastward through Sinai and Palestine,
where Canon Tristram has observed the Swallow
in December, we find it common in the north-west
provinces of India during the winter months, at
which season also it occurs in Japan, China, the
Andamans, and Ceylon. There is no evidence
that it ever visits Australia or New Zealand,
although Gould described a Swallow from Torres
Straits (under the name Hzrundo fretensis), which
is certainly very like our well-known A. rustica,
and might be a young bird of that species in
autumn plumage.

Did space permit, it would be as easy to trace
the movements of most of our summer migrants
during the various months of the year, for (as
above stated) they are now tolerably well known.

It is a curious fact that with many migratory
birds (as, for example, the Nightingale and Black-
cap) the males arrive here several days before the
females. I have never met with any satisfactory
explanation of this; but it seems to me it may be
accounted for in this way. The rate of speed in
flying, depending upon individual strength, is
different in the two sexes, and if they were to
start together, the superior strength and wing
power of the males would result in overtaxing the
strength of the hen birds, which, in their efforts to
keep pace, would exhaust themselves, and succumb
on the journey, thereby disorganising the flock. It
is probably for this reason that the sexes travel
BIRDS AND LIGHTHOUSES 267

separately, and apart. Each goes its own pace,
and the flocks then keep well together on their
route.

Another fact which has been ascertained and
placed beyond doubt by experiments made at
various times and places, is that the same in-
dividual birds return year by year to particular
spots where they have successfully reared their
young. This has been proved by the experiment
of catching birds on the nest without injuring them,
marking them by tying silver wire or coloured
twine round the legs, and restoring them to
liberty. The following year the marked birds have
been caught in their old haunts! Nowadays,
therefore, no one doubts the fact of migration.
What we want to know, however, is the cause or
causes, the manner zz which, and the faculty whereby
it is performed.

It is remarkable that until quite recently no
English ornithologist had set himself earnestly to
work to try and solve these problems. It is true
that for the last century, ever since the days of
Gilbert White and Markwick (whose ‘‘ Calendars of
Nature” are so familiar to us), hundreds of persons
have amused themselves with noting the earliest
and latest dates of arrival and departure of
migratory birds, and some of them have carried out
the practice for many years. But they have done
nothing more. Their observations have brought
us no nearer to a solution of the questions at
issue. Indeed the great mass of such reports
of the arrivals of migratory birds as are annually
268 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

printed in natural history journals are practically
useless. Those published under assumed names or
initials would be, of course, ignored by any
Statistician taking up the subject, since they
neither afford evidence of the competency of the
reporter, nor furnish means of instituting a corre-
spondence should inquiries be necessary to clear up
doubtful statements, or elicit further information.
But even supposing that such reports were properly
authenticated, they would not serve to explain the
cause or causes of migration, or the faculty by
which it is performed; they would at most only
tend to elucidate the manner in which birds
migrate, by fixing the line or lines of the route
which they take.

In this country no one seems to have been at
the pains to collect and arrange the authenticated
records of arrival and departure with this object
until in 1879 a Committee of the British Association
was appointed for the purpose. But in Russia an
attempt of the kind was made in 1855 by Dr von
Middendorf, who published at St Petersburg an
important treatise on the subject.’. He collated
the records of the arrival of migratory birds through-
out the Russian empire, and endeavoured to trace
the lines of simultaneous arrival (as indicating the
route taken) by ascertaining the average date of
arrival of each species at localities where observa-
tions had been regularly taken, and connecting

1 Die ILsepiptesen Russlands. toog = equalis; emizrysis=
advolatus, or, as we may term it, the lines of simultaneous
arrival.
BIRDS AND LIGHTHOUSES 269

these places by lines on a map for each species.
The lines thus drawn show the equality or inequality
of advance made by the species in different
longitudes, and, assuming that this advance is right
across the isepiptesial lines, or the tract lying
between each pair of them, the route of migration
is thus clearly indicated. The conclusion at which
he arrives is, that in Central Siberia the general
direction taken by migratory birds (he enumerates
seven species) is almost due north, in Eastern
Siberia from south-east to north-west, and in
European Russia from south-west to north-east.

Another Continental naturalist, Herr Palmen,
pursuing a similar line of inquiry, published, in 1874,
at Helsingfors, an important work (originally in
Swedish, afterwards translated into German) on the
migration of birds, in which he also endeavoured
to trace the general routes taken, and to explain
the cause or causes of migration.’

The routes usually pursued he believes to be
nine in number; and, if we mark these out on a map
of Europe, it must be confessed they appear some-
what confusing, as so many of the lines cross, and
the evidence that such routes as those indicated are
taken seems scarcely strong enough to establish the
facts contended for. In fact, these routes are
merely conjectural. Moreover, it is evident that
the routes must vary, as proved by the absence or
scarcity in some years of particular species along a
line of route on which they are usually common.

Dr Weissmann considers, and so also does

1 Ceber die Zugstrassen der Vogel. 8vo. Leipzig, 1876.
270 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Dr A. R. Wallace, that there is a connection be-
tween the routes taken and the position of sub-
merged land over which the birds migrated in past
ages. Possibly this may be so, though probably the
connection is accidental. At anyrate, to prove
the case, it would be necessary to show that the
habit of migration is older than the subsidence of
the submerged land, and that the migrants prefer a
longer route over a shallow sea to a shorter route
over a deep one.

From what has been actually observed, it would
appear that birds on passage, as a rule, follow the
coast lines, the courses of great rivers, and the low
country lying at the base of mountain chains.

As regards the direction taken by migrating
flocks, I shall presently invite attention to what
English naturalists have been able to advance on
this point, through the instrumentality of the light-
house keepers; but, before taking leave of the
Continental authorities just quoted, it may be well
to consider their views (shared as they are by many
of our ornithologists) respecting the cause of migra-
tion, and the faculty by which it is performed.

It would seem that there are at least three
primary causes for the migration of birds: (1)
failure of food at certain seasons; (2) change of
temperature ; and (3) what may be termed ‘“home-
affection,” or a longing to return to the real home,
which (as before stated) is the country where
it rears its young, or where it has itself been
reared.

It is the 7rs¢ of these causes apparently which
BIRDS AND LIGHTHOUSES 27%

influences the departure in the autumn; the ¢hird
of these which provokes the return in spring ; while
the second may be allowed to have an important
bearing on the movements of birds at all seasons.

In making this statement, it should be observed
that I am not putting forth the views enunciated by
any particular writers to whom I have referred, but
am rather stating the conclusions at which I have
arrived after some consideration of the subject, and
a perusal of what they and others have written.

As regards the faculty by which migration is
performed, it is much more difficult to express an
opinion, although I might give expression to the
views of others who are much better able than I
am to form a judgment in the matter. Before
coming to any conclusion on this point, however,
it seems desirable to consider first the probable
origin of the instinct of migration.

It is not unreasonable to assume that the change
in climate at the close of the Tertiary period, which
reduced the temperature of the higher latitudes from
warm temperate to frigid conditions, must have
resulted in the crowding of bird-life towards the
equator, thereby intensifying the struggle for ex-
istence to such a degree, that overcrowding would
induce those species best able to withstand climatic
change to avail themselves of the milder interim of
summer to enlarge the boundaries of their range,
while the recurrence of winter would force a.
temporary removal to milder regions."

1 T have here adopted the views, in his own words, of a well-
known American ornithologist, Mr J. J. Allen.
272 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Granting the hereditary nature of habit now so
generally conceded, we have at once conditions for
the development of a new instinct, at first doubt-
less feeble and uncertain in action, but strengthen-
ing by exercise, and by the inevitable “weeding
out” of individuals in whom it was weakest.

With the increased diversity in the conditions
of environment called into existence by the great
climatic and other changes occurring at or near
the close of the Tertiary epoch, there was greater
play for the modifying action of physical influences,
resulting in the development of new specific types,
as well as the instinct of migration.

Accepting this as the probable origin of migra-
tion, we have then to consider how birds are guided
in their long journeys. Their ability to find their
way across continents and over vast tracts of desert,
or sea, is doubtless the result of heredity of habit
and the experience of individuals. We are all
familiar with the “homing” instinct in carrier
pigeons, and with the remarkable way in which
lost dogs find their way back to their masters from
considerable distances. We have all wondered, too,
at the extraordinary way in which birds from a
distance will return straight to a well-concealed
nest in the middle of a field, marsh, or wood, ‘or in
the midst of heather or thick furze. To do this, and
to find out an old nesting-place after an interval of
many months’ absence from the country, implies an
exercise of memory as true as it is astonishing,

Again, the power of vision in birds is very great,
far greater than it is in man, as I have been able
BIRDS AND LIGHTHOUSES 273

to prove by a very good test... They are thus
enabled to perceive landmarks at a distance which
to us would be invisible. Practice, or the experience
gained by individual birds which have previously
made the same journey, must be taken into account
when considering how the migrating flocks are led.
No one of these causes by itself seems sufficient
to explain how migratory birds are guided in their
journeys, but, taken collectively, it may be fairly
assumed that heredity of habit, combined with
acute viston, memory, and experience, explain what
otherwise seems so great a mystery.

In the case of adult birds only can we fairly
allege individual experience and memory as the
cause. This cannot apply to young birds, which
make their journey for the first time; or to those
which in the autumnal migration precede their
parents (as it is well-known many species do) by
intervals of some days or even weeks. This, how-
ever, only strengthens the view that the instinct of
migration is really ¢vansmitted habit, and that the
knowledge of routes depends more upon inherited
than individual experience. When we consider
that this heredity has been in operation for
thousands of generations of migratory birds, it
may well be supposed to have acquired a force
sufficient to preclude the necessity for a
knowledge of routes acquired through individual
experience.

There is one more point in connection with the
general subject of migration upon which a brief

1 See Essays on Sport and Natural History, 1883, p. 126.
S
274 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

remark or two may be made. I refer to the
accidental appearance of solitary migrants at places
far out of their usual course. These wanderers are
almost invariably observed during the autumn
migration, and are almost always birds of the year.
To account for their erratic appearance, we have
only to assume that by some accident they have
lost the sense of direction, or that they have been
blown out of their course by storms or adverse
winds. The observations of ornithologists certainly
tend to prove that the latter is probably the true
explanation of their appearance. This is well
illustrated by the occasional occurrence in Western
Europe, and particularly in the British Islands, of
many North American species, which could only
have reached our shores in this way ; it being well-
known that the prevailing winds and course of
storms is from North America towards Europe, and
not in the opposite direction. It rarely happens
that European birds are met with in eastern North
America."

This mention of the effect of storms on birds of
passage naturally leads to the inquiry to what
extent they avail themselves of favourable winds
at the time of their migration; and this again
leads us directly to consider how far the keepers
of lighthouses and lightships are enabled, from
their stationary position at excellent posts of obser-
vation, ‘‘to throw light,” literally, upon this and
other questions affecting the general subject.

1 See the chapter which follows on the occasional occurrence
in America of the European Woodcock.
BIRDS AND LIGHTHOUSES a7 5

Until the British Association appointed a
Committee to take the matter in hand, the great
difficulty in collecting reliable statistics on migra-
tion arose from the want of stationary observers at
fixed points. The lighthouse men, from the
nature of their occupation, were on the look-out
night and day, and it was suggested that with
a little training they might be made extremely
useful. It was an excellent idea to enlist their
services, and it was fortunate that the Com-
mittee appointed by the British Association to deal
with the matter experienced no difficulty in secur-
ing the co-operation of the Master and Brethren of
the Trinity House, the Commissioners of Northern
Lights, and the Commissioners of Irish Lights.
The result was that nearly two hundred stations of
observation were established around the coasts
of Great Britain, at which the men in charge were
constantly on the look-out for migratory birds,
making daily observations, and filling up printed
forms supplied to them, on which they noted the
time of day or night at which the birds were seen,
the direction in which they were flying, the direc-
tion of the wind and the temperature, identifying
the species of bird if possible by obtaining
specimens, or describing their appearance as
accurately as they could. The men as a rule
thoroughly entered into the spirit of the thing, and
it furnished a pleasant occupation. The printed
forms with which they were supplied were filled up
and transmitted at the end of the year to the
different members of the British Association
276 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Committee, who had undertaken to collect and
report upon them. The experiment has already
borne fruit. Nine Annual Reports have been
published, which have been admirably summarised
by Mr W. Eagle Clarke of the Royal Scottish
Museum, Edinburgh, and the Committee are already
in a position to draw some useful conclusions from
the statistics collected—conclusions, moreover,
which are being strengthened and confirmed by
continued observation. The best returns (as might
be expected) have been received from isolated
stations, lighthouses on islands, and skerries off
the coast, as well as light vessels. From light-
houses some distance inland, or surrounded by
houses, few returns are received.

Amongst the general conclusions at which
the Committee were enabled to arrive from the
statistics collected are the following :—

On the east coasts of Scotland and England the
main line of migration during the autumn takes
the form of a broad stream from east to west, cover-
ing the whole of the east coast. This is the line
mainly followed by the passerine birds.

Sea-fowl, as a rule, migrate some distance out
at sea; waders along the coast.

Birds have been observed to cross at all hours
of the day and night, and in all weathers. They
seldom fly dead to windward, except with very
light breezes, and strong opposing winds retard
their passage. When the wind changes during the
passage, they are observed to alter their course
accordingly.
BIRDS AND LIGHTHOUSES B77

The height at which birds travel is believed to
depend more on the state of the weather at starting
than on the direction of the wind. On clear light
nights, as a rule, they travel high. In fog, rain, or
snow, and in thick, murky weather they fly low,
often only a few feet above the waves. On dark
nights lost birds will wheel for hours round a light-
ship, but with the first break in the clouds, the
stars appearing, or streak of early dawn, they are
on their course again to the nearest land. The
comparatively low altitude at which they travel
during foggy or dull weather has probably a good
deal to do with the numbers which are killed at
lighthouses. Broadly speaking, it is the brightest,
whitest, fixed lights which best penetrate the fog
or darkness, and attract most birds.

These are some of the more interesting facts
which have been brought to light through the
agency of the lighthouse-keepers, and we are now
in a fair way, through their instrumentality, of
obtaining a satisfactory solution to some of the
vexed questions upon the subject of migration
which I have attempted briefly—I fear somewhat
imperfectly—to explain."

1 This chapter formed the substance of one of the “ Davis

Lectures” which I gave under the auspices of the Zoological
Society at the Regents Park Gardens.
THE MIGRATION OF WOODCOCKS

To many a man the Christmas woodcock is of more
importance than the Christmas turkey; three or
four days’ covert shooting in the last week of
December is more attractive to him than all the
fattened fowl in Christendom. Not that the
pursuit of the one bird may not be followed by the
consumption of the other, for a good day’s sport
usually argues comfortable country quarters and a
good cuzszne,; but the idea paramount is shooting,
not eating, and the fervent wish of the shooter is
that the coverts may hold a good sprinkling of
cock.

Whether the birds have been bred in the
neighbourhood, or have ‘“‘come in” from a distance,
is to many persons a matter of indifference so long
as they are to be found when wanted. The great
charm about the Woodcock is the uncertainty of
discovering his exact whereabouts, and the further
uncertainty of bringing him to bag when flushed.
For it is one thing to see a Woodcock and another
thing to get him. It is surprising how many, who
are good shots at pheasants and rabbits, will miss a
Woodcock when they have the chance; and it is
amusing to note how many excellent reasons are

at once forthcoming to explain the failure—‘ The
278
THE MIGRATION OF WOODCOCKS 279

sun was right in my eyes,” or ‘‘ There was agreat tree
in the way,” or “the bird was going back right
over the beaters, and so one had to shoot in a hurry,”
and so forth. The fact remains; the bird has been
missed, and may not be seen again that day. In
certain favoured districts—in the west of England
and in Ireland, for example—such an event would
cause but little disappointment, the supply of cocks
being sufficiently good to allow of plenty of misses,
and yet to provide a good bag of “ longbills” at
the end of the day.

In Cornwall the first flights generally arrive
about the second week in October and with the
wind at any point from south to east. In one year,
however, a continuance of north-east winds to the
end of October, with a waning moon, brought a
large flight of woodcocks to the Land’s End district.
One gun then killed fifty-four in a week, and another
thirty-nine in a day.

In Northumberland these birds have been
observed to arrive in the greatest numbers in hazy
weather with little wind, and that blowing from the
north-east. In Norfolk it has been remarked that
the nocturnal migrations of the Woodcock are
influenced rather by the wind than the moon, and
they have been found quite abundant on that coast
after a dark night with the wind from the north or
north-east. In Yorkshire and Lincolnshire some
of the largest flights have been known to arrive
about October 10 or 12 with a strong east wind,
fog, and drizzling rain. At Spurn Point sixty have
been shot in one morning after a fresh north-east
280 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

wind the previous night, with drizzling rain, and at
Skegness forty-three were shot in the same day
under similar conditions of wind and weather.

The Annual Reports which have been published
by a Committee of the British Association, appointed
to collect information in regard to the migration of
birds from the keepers of the lighthouses and light-
ships, furnish some curious and interesting statistics
concerning the arrival of woodcocks in autumn, and
establish the following facts: their migration takes
place chiefly at night: birds which strike the
lanterns of the lighthouses are generally picked up
between midnight and daybreak: when a large
number come over together, as they often do, they
fly wth the wind; but, as an exception, single
birds have been seen to arrive with the wind agazust
them. During the autumn migration comparatively
few are observed at stations on the west coast of
Scotland, while during the spring migration few are
seen on the east coast, and this applies to England
as well as to Scotland.

In 1882 large numbers of woodcocks arrived on
the east coast of England on the night of October 12,
or early morning of the 13th, with a strong easterly
wind, fog, and drizzling rain. On the morning of
the 13th they were reported from nine different
stations, covering two hundred and fifty miles of
coast line, from the Farne Islands to Orfordness.
Presumably this, the great flight of the season, did
not start from the same locality, but from various
parts of the opposite coast of Europe—places
perhaps widely apart. Both before and after
 

A LOST WOODCOCK.
282 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

their passage the weather had been much of the
same character over the North Sea. Why they
should start simultaneously on this particular
evening, and how they managed to keep touch (to
use a military term) during a passage of several
hundred miles across a stormy sea in fog and
drizzling rain, so as to arrive about the same time
on our English sandhills, is one of those points in
the phenomena of migration which will probably
take some time and more extended observations,
especially on the opposite coast line, to clear up.

It has not been demonstrated that the sexes
travel apart, as is known to be the case with
certain small passerine birds; but in the opinion of
some persons there are two distinct races of Wood-
cock, one large and light-coloured, the other small
and dark, which keep apart and arrive independ-
ently. Mr Clubley of Kilnsea, near the Spurn,
who enjoys the reputation of having shot more
cocks than anybody else on the east coast,
informed Mr Cordeaux, the author of Zhe Birds of
the Humber District, that a south-east wind always
brings large grey or light-coloured woodcocks, and
a north wind small and red-coloured birds ; and this
rule is said to apply to other parts of the east
coast.?

Mr Stevenson, in his account of the Birds of
Norfolk, has published some interesting details of
woodcock-shooting in that county, mentioning
some notable bags which have been made in
certain favoured coverts, and I have already

* Fifth Report, 1887, p. 51, note.
THE MIGRATION OF WOODCOCKS 283

referred above to the sport which these birds
sometimes afford in Cornwall and the Scilly
Islands. But, of all places in the British Islands
for this kind of shooting, none are comparable to
certain localities in the west and south-west of
Ireland. Sligo and Mayo are noted counties for
Woodcock. In Mayo 10 to 30 couple is a fair

 

A WOODCOCK’S NEST.

day’s sport for a party of six guns, but 4o couple
have been killed in a day in one of Lord Sligo’s
woods. At Lissadel, in the Co. Sligo, 150 couple
were killed in three days by a party of eight guns,
and at the same place on another occasion 338
cocks were bagged in six days by seven guns. In
284 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the Co. Kerry, the year Lord Elcho resided at
Muckross, Killarney, the party, averaging five
guns, shot in ten days 840 cocks, and during that
winter (1863-1864) 1250 were killed on the estate.
On Lord Ardilaun’s estate at Ashford, Co. Galway,
the woodcock-shooting is famous. Here, on a
day in January, five guns bagged 106 birds; and
six guns 350 cock in a week. On the two best
days of this week there were killed respectively
117 and 115 birds. In January 1880 six guns
killed 365 cock in four days, killing on one day 165,
and on another 82 birds. According to Sir
R. Payne Gallwey, from whose excellent work,
The Fowler in Ireland, these figures are quoted,
‘from three to four hundred cock is a good yearly
average on a favoured estate in Ireland; but in
exceptionally good seasons this number may be
nearly doubled.”

It is generally supposed that woodcocks on
their arrival here are lean and out of condition,
Lieut.-Colonel Cuppage, in Zhe Freld of 6th April
1872, reported having seen a flight of about 100
woodcocks arriving on the north coast of Ireland in
an exhausted state. He caught several and found
them to be in such poor condition that he released
them. But this is not always so. Sir, R. Payne
Gallwey states that, out of hundreds which he
examined during the exceptionally long and severe
winter of 1880-1881, only a dozen were small and
poor birds, and at the end of the frost he picked
out three birds, each of which weighed exactly 16
oz., a fourth weighing 18} 0z. These must have
THE MIGRATION OF WOODCOCKS 285

been exceptionally fine birds, for the average
weight of a Woodcock may be set down at 12 oz. or
thereabouts. Of such phenomenal weights as
those of 24 oz. and 27 oz. mentioned by Yarrell as
appertaining to woodcocks shot in Norfolk and
Suffolk, it may be remarked (as has been said of
many great and good men before now) we shall
probably ‘‘never look upon their like again.”

It is often asserted that the sexes of the Wood-
cock may be distinguished by the appearance of the
first primary feather in the wing, in which, it is said,
the outer web is of a uniform colour in the female,
and has white or buffy-white zigzag markings on a
darker ground in the male bird. This, however, is
a fallacy. The variation is not indicative of sex
but of age, the young birds having the outer web of
this feather variegated, the oldones plain. In point
of fact the sexes are externally indistinguishable.
THE EUROPEAN WOODCOCK IN
AMERICA

THE question is sometimes asked whether the
European Woodcock occurs in America, and the
answer to be given to such question is that the
appearance of our Woodcock on the other side of
the Atlantic is of such very rare occurrence that the
instances which have been recorded may be counted
on one’s fingers.

I have been at some pains to search for such
records, and a summary of them will be, I think, of
interest to naturalists and sportsmen. It may be
observed, ex passant, that the Faroe Islands lie
beyond the western limit of the ordinary range of
this bird, and, so far as I am aware, it has only once
been met with there. This was on the island of
Naalsoe on November 15, 1852 (see Miller,
Feroernes Fuglefauna, p. 26; and Feilden, Birds
of the Farve Islands, Zoologist, 1872). In the
British Islands the extreme western limit of its
range is probably Achill Island, off the coast of
Mayo.

The earliest report which I have been able to
find of the appearance and capture of a European
Woodcock in America is in 7he /ézs for 1862, where

(at p. 284) in a notice of the stuffed birds which
286
WOODCOCK IN AMERICA 287

were on view in the International Exhibition of
1862, mention is made of a photograph of one (too
much injured to admit of preservation), which was
shot at an open spring near St John’s, Newfound-
land, on January 9, 1862, afterlong continued easterly
winds. It was stated in a notice affixed to the
frame that, although the ground had been covered
with snow for many weeks, the bird was in good
condition and weighed 12% oz., ora trifle more than
the average weight of British killed examples.

In a “Catalogue of Birds observed on New
York, Long and Staten Islands and the adjacent
parts of New Jersey,” published in Zhe Annals of
the Lyceum of Natural History of New York (vol.
viii., April, 1866), by the late Mr G. N. Lawrence,
a well-known American ornithologist, that writer
makes the following observation on the European
Woodcock :—

‘“‘T have had an example of this species for some
years, which was sent me by Mr William Galbraith,
accompanied with this note dated December 6, 1859.
‘A poultry dealer in Washington Market informed
me that he had seen in the market a strange bird,
which in his opinion was an overgrown Woodcock.
I went to see it, and found it to be a true European
Woodcock. It was badly shot, part of the bill and
skull being carried away, but fresh and otherwise
in good order. The person I got it from said that
he bought it with a lot of quail on board the
Shrewsbury _ boat.’ Doubtless” (writes Mr
Lawrence), “it was killed near Shrewsbury, New
Jersey, and apparently with coarse shot. It was,
284 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the Co. Kerry, the year Lord Elcho resided at
Muckross, Killarney, the party, averaging five
guns, shot in ten days 840 cocks, and during that
winter (1863-1864) 1250 were killed on the estate.
On Lord Ardilaun’s estate at Ashford, Co. Galway,
the woodcock-shooting is famous. Here, on a
day in January, five guns bagged 106 birds; and
six guns 350 cock in a week. On the two best
days of this week there were killed respectively
117 and 115 birds. In January 1880 six guns
killed 365 cock in four days, killing on one day 165,
and on another 82 birds. According to Sir
R. Payne Gallwey, from whose excellent work,
The Fowler in Ireland, these figures are quoted,
‘from three to four hundred cock is a good yearly
average on a favoured estate in Ireland; but in
exceptionally good seasons this number may be
nearly doubled.”

It is generally supposed that woodcocks on
their arrival here are lean and out of condition.
Lieut.-Colonel Cuppage, in Zhe Fie/d of 6th April
1872, reported having seen a flight of about 100
woodcocks arriving on the north coast of Ireland in
an exhausted state. He caught several and found
them to be in such poor condition that he released
them. But this is not always so. Sir. R. Payne
Gallwey states that, out of hundreds which he
examined during the exceptionally long and severe
winter of 1880-1881, only a dozen were small and
poor birds, and at the end of the frost he picked
out three birds, each of which weighed exactly 16
oz., a fourth weighing 18} oz. These must have
WOODCOCK IN AMERICA 289

was 74 0z., the average weight of that bird being,
in his experience, about 54 oz. He considered
the weight alone sufficient to determine the species,
but added that “the character of the wing settled
the matter beyond dispute.” Dr Elliott Coues
added that, so far as he could remember, there had
hitherto been no recorded instance of the occurrence
of the European Woodcock south of New Jersey.

Since the publication of the last-named record,
a European Woodcock has been reported to have
been shot in Michigan,’ one of the northern States
lying between Lakes Michigan, Huron, and Erie ;
but Virginia still remains the southernmost State in
which, so far as we know, this bird has been actually
obtained. In these circumstances, it was with
no little surprise that I received a letter signed by
the captain, chief engineer, second officer, and chief
steward of a steamer lying in the Strait of
Magellan, certifying that a European Woodcock
had been shot in Isthmus Bay in October 1895.
The letter ran as follows :—

“SS. ‘Gur or Papua,’ IstHmus Bay,
“ SmMyTHE’s CHANNEL, STRAITS OF MAGELLAN,
“* October 6, 1895.

“ This is to certify that inclosed skin of wood-
cock was shot in Isthmus Bay, long. 73° 37’ W.,
lat. 52° 10° S., on the above date, and eaten by
Captain Thomas H. Cook; shot by chief engineer,
Forster Hardy; seen by second officer, W. Lane,

R.N.R.; seen by chief steward, George Addis.
1 Bull. Nuttall, Orn. Club, vol. ii., p. 75.
r
290 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

This is to clear a doubt as to this bird being seen
so far south, as expressed in correspondence in the
Field some considerable time ago, the signatures of
those mentioned being appended.”

It was with no little curiosity that I opened the
packet which accompanied this letter, and found, as
[ had expected, that the bird sent was not the
European Woodcock, for which it had been
mistaken, but one of the large South American
snipes (Gallinago /Jamesonz), which, from its size,
robust form, and general colouration, might well be
confounded with our better-known species. The
incident shows how important it is in cases of this
kind to forward the skin of the bird for identifica-
tion. Had no specimen accompanied this letter,
the solemn declaration made by four conscientious
eye-witnesses might have carried conviction to the
minds of many that a European Woodcock had
been actually shot at the southern extremity of
South America. As it is, the chief interest of
the occurrence lies in the fact that the acquisition of
this particular specimen extends the limit of the
southward range of this large snipe somewhat
further than was previously known, as may be
seen on reference to the descriptions and figures in
Messrs Sclater and Salvin’s £xotze Ornithology,
1867, and to the fuller account of the South
American Scolopacide given by the late Mr Henry
Seebohm in his monograph of this group of birds.
The specimen in question has been presented to
the British Museum, where, on account of the
WOODCOCK IN AMERICA 291

locality where it was procured, it proves to be an
acceptable addition to the national collection.

The thanks of naturalists are due to Captain T.
H. Cook and his officers for having taken the
trouble to preserve and forward a bird which, in
their effort ‘‘to clear up a doubt,” has established a
fact of geographical distribution that is worth
noting.

There was some excuse for mistaking Jameson’s
Snipe for a Woodcock, since there are several points
of resemblance, while in size there is but little
difference. The wings of both have short primaries
and long secondaries, and the legs are feathered to
the tarso-tibial joint, as in the typical Woodcocks
(see p. 299). On the other hand, in Jameson’s Snipe
the head is streaked longitudinally instead of trans-
versely. So that while it is not a true Woodcock
it is not quite a typical Snipe.

It was originally discovered by William Jameson
near Quito in Ecuador, and has since been found
on the southern slope of Chimborazo, and on the
eastern slope of the Andes in Bolivia; but is still
one of the rarest birds in collections.
WHITE AND PIED WOODCOCKS

Varieties of the Woodcock with more or less
white about them, or in other words with feathers
in which (probably from injury by shot) there has
been a failure in the secretion of the colouring
pigment, are not very uncommon. Indeed, hardly
a shooting season comes round in which we do not
see a few and hear of others. On November 13,
1897, a pied bird of this description was shot near St
Keverne, Cornwall, and was forwarded for preserva-
tion to Messrs Rowland Ward & Co., who were
good enough to send it for my inspection. In this
example three flight feathers in the left wing were
pure white, and there were also several white
feathers in the wing-coverts. The rest of the
plumage was of the normal colour. The bird, an
old one, was in good condition and weighed 124 oz.
The correspondent who communicated the cir-
cumstance of its having been shot remarked in his
letter that he would be glad to know whether any-
one had ever met with a similar freak ; for although
he had handled, as he said, a large number of
Woodcocks, and had seen two cream-coloured
specimens, he had never before seen a pied one.
On October 26, 1897, a pure white Woodcock
was killed on the Pitcroy shootings, Strathspey, be-

longing to Mr C. Pelham Burn, and, as a great
292
WHITE AND PIED WOODCOCKS 293

curiosity, was sent to an Edinburgh bird-stuffer for
preservation. My informant wrote: ‘‘It would
interest me and several of my friends very much if
you would kindly tell me in what books or papers |
could find mention of other white Woodcocks
being killed or seen.”

If a careful search were made through back
numbers of the /zedd, the Zoologist, and other
journals devoted to such subjects, there is no doubt
that a number of records of white Woodcocks might
be brought to light. The same remark will apply
to such books as relate to county ornithology. It
will suffice to quote the following instances, of which
I have notes at hand :—

Bewick states that a white Woodcock was seen
for three successive winters in Penrice Wood, near
Penrice Castle, in Glamorganshire; it was re-
peatedly flushed and shot at during that time, in
the very same place where it was first discovered ;
at last it was found dead with several others which
had perished by the severity of the weather in the
winter of 1793. This account, subsequently copied
by Montagu in his Ornzthological Dictionary, was
communicated to Bewick by Sir John Trevelyan,
Bart., on the authority of the Rev. Dr Hunt, and
proves not only the existence of a white Woodcock,
but also the truth of the assertion, that these birds
return to the same haunts year by year.

The late Mr G. Dawson Rowley many years
ago showed me an oil painting of a white Wood-
cock, with the following inscription: ‘‘ This very
remarkable Woodcock was shot by the Earl of
294 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Gainsborough, November 7, 1748, and painted
from the bird itself by S. Goodwin, of Oakham.”
Presumably it was killed in the coverts at Exton
Park, near Oakham.

Daniel, in his Rural Sports (vol. iii., pp. 167,
168), mentions several instances of white Wood-
cocks that had come under his observation.
Amongst others, he notices one ‘‘completely
white,” that was shot by a keeper of Sir John
Lade’s at Salehurst, in Sussex ; a second with both
wings white, killed the same year at Box, in Somer-
setshire ; and a third, “milk-white,” killed by Mr
Ludlow’s gamekeeper near Westbury, Wilts. In
1833 a Woodcock with white feathers in the wings
was observed in a covert at Monkleigh, near
Torrington, Devon. The same bird, or one of
precisely similar plumage, reappeared in the same
place for four consecutive seasons, and was so often
shot at and missed, that it became known to people
in the neighbourhood as ‘the witch.” In 1837,
however, it was at length shot at Portledge on the
property of the Rev. J. T. Pine Coffin, who had
it preserved. The late Mr Henry Stevenson, in
the second volume of his Bzvds of Norfolk (p.295),
says :—

‘The most beautiful specimen of the Woodcock
I ever saw was killed at Hanworth, near Aylsham,
on November 6, 1856. Like one described by Mr
Edward Newman in 7%e Zoologist for 1855 (p. 4631),
all the markings peculiar to the Woodcock in its
usual plumage were in this bird more or less faintly
indicated by the most delicate buff, or fawn tint, on
WHITE AND PIED WOODCOCKS 295

a ground of white, whilst those parts which in the
normal colouring of the species are deepest, were
here also most plainly discernible. The whole of
the under parts were white, yet still showing the
usual bars when closely examined, resembling the
faintest water-markings, visible only in the
strongest light. On November 16, 1864, acuriously

 

A PIED WOODCOCK.

pied bird, now in the possession of Lord Hastings,
was shot at Melton Constable. In this specimen
all the primaries of one wing, except the fourth,
and the wing-coverts, were pure white; and in
the other wing the three first primaries and one or
two feathers in the coverts, the rest of the plumage
being of the usual tint. On March 17, 1859, a
Woodcock was also killed near Lowestoft, in
296 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Suffolk, having the back and wings thickly
sprinkled with white feathers, as were also the
sides of the neck and the under parts generally.”

Mr Stevenson likewise reported (Zoodogzst, 1873,
p. 3712) that in April 1873 a pure white Woodcock
was seen at Corton. A Woodcock with white wings
was shot some years ago near Edenhall, where it is
still preserved (Birds of Cumberland, p. 145); and
a piebald one was obtained at Lowestoft Manor in
1859 (Birds of Suffolk, p. 146).

On January 1, 1874, a pure white Woodcock was
shot near Tallow, Co. Waterford, and was sent to
Dublin for preservation by Mr Williams, of Dame
Street.

Messrs D’Urban and Mathew in their Bzrds of
Devon (p. 319) state that white and cream-coloured
varieties have been obtained in that county, and
are not very rare. Montagu had a cream-coloured
specimen presented to him by Mr Bulteel, of Flete ;
another was purchased in the Exeter Market by
Mr Comyns, who had also a white variety shot by
the Hon. Newton Fellowes at Exmouth. One
with white feathers in the wings was shot on the
manor of Monkleigh, near Tiverton, having fre-
quented the same spot for four years. A similar
specimen occurred in North Devon in October 1889.
Mr T. Clode shot a_buff-coloured Woodcock at
Waitchcombe, near Honiton, which was preserved
by Mr Anning, bird-stuffer, Honiton, for Mr W.
Baines, who was at the time residing at Shute
Park. A buff-coloured one, with white wings,
occurred in North Devon, anda white one was shot
WHITE AND PIED WOODCOCKS 297

at Portledge that had been seen in the coverts for
several seasons in succession. Mr John Gatcombe
described a very pretty variety which was sent into
Plymouth from Cornwall. It had a pure white
patch on the top of its head, a ring round the neck
taking in part of the chest, and white wing-coverts,
the bases of the primaries being also tinged with
the same; the other parts were of the usual colour,
or, perhaps, a shade lighter, the whole plumage
strongly reminding him, as he said, of that of the
Snow Bunting in winter.

Mr J. Whitaker, of Rainworth Lodge, near
Mansfield, has in his collection some curious
varieties of the Woodcock. One of these is white,
with patches of black on the head, back, and tail,
and with faint longitudinal streaks on the primaries
and secondaries. This bird was shot in Ireland,
near Londonderry, in 1880. One of the latest
instances noted occurred at Fishley, Norfolk,
where, on January 29, 1895, a white Woodcock was
shot by Mr Read. Finally, I may mention “a
melanite form,” so described by Babington in his
Birds of Suffolk, which was shot near Ousden Hall,
in that county, on November 2, 1884, and a black
variety shot at Cromer, as recorded in the veld
of November 13, 1869.

Thus it would appear that white and pied Wood-
cocks, and even black or very dark varieties like the
so-called Sabine’s Snipe, have been met with at
irregular intervals in various parts of the country,
and further search would doubtless bring to light
many more instances than those above cited.
SNIPE AND THEIR DISTINCTIONS

In many parts of the world where, from the nature
of the country, game is not to be found in any
quantity, sportsmen would fare badly if it were not
for Snipe. Few birds are more widely distributed
over the surface of the globe, and when found in
their proper haunts and at the right season of the
year, having regard to their migratory habits, no
birds afford better sport with the gun. Almost
every country has its own peculiar species, bearing,
it is true, a general resemblance in colour and
markings to the European snipe, with which the
generality of sportsmen are familiar, yet differing
from that bird in certain respects which have only
to be pointed out to be at once recognised. The
general family likeness, indeed, is so great that
even those who have shot hundreds of Snipe in
India, Ceylon, South Africa, and North and South
America seldom recognise the fact that they are
distinct from those which are to be met with on
English marshes, or in Irish bogs. The reason for
this general resemblance is obvious. The coloura-
tion of these birds is protective. The dark body
colour crossed with pale buff lines, which harmonise
so well with the peaty soil and the withered grass
stems amongst which these birds live, favours their
concealment in the most effective manner ; so much
298
SNIPE AND THEIR DISTINCTIONS 299

so that it is extremely difficult to see a Snipe upon
the ground, as every experienced snipe-shooter
knows who has walked up to his dog’s point and
tried to discover the bird sitting. It is a
wonderful provision of nature, this protective
colouration, to ensure the preservation of the
species. Few facts in natural history are more
striking than such harmony of colour with natural
surroundings.

The distinction between English and foreign
Snipe is not merely a difference of size, as many
persons appear to think. Nothing is commoner
than to read of the Australian Snipe that
it is exactly like the English bird, only bigger.
The officer on leave in South Africa will affirm
that the Black-quilled Snipe of Natal is precisely
similar to the bird he has shot in Norfolk, only
darker ; while the sportsman who has killed a few
of the large snipe of South America will insist on
calling them ‘‘ Woodcock.” It is important, there-
fore, at the outset to recognise the difference
between a Snipe and a Woodcock, since this will
enable us to separate them at once into two well-
marked groups. In the Snipe the head is streaked
or barred longitudinally, in the Woodcock trans-
versely ; in the former bird the flight feathers are
plain, in the latter variegated. In the Snipe
also the leg is bare above the tarso-tibial joint
(popularly, though wrongly, termed the knee), while
in the Woodcock it is feathered to that joint. Of
the twenty or more distinct species of Snipe known
to naturalists three only are found in the British
300 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Islands, the remainder being natives of Siberia,
China, India, Ceylon, the Malay Archipelago,
Australia, New Zealand, Africa, Madagascar,
North and South America.

The so-called Common or Full Snipe (Fig. 1), so
much sought for by English sportsmen, has a wide
geographical range. It is found throughout Europe

 

 

TAIL FEATHERS OF THE COMMON SNIPE.

(including Iceland and the Farées) and Northern
Asia up to about lat. 70°, and migrates southward
in winter to North Africa, India, and the Malay
countries. In India, China, and the Malay Archi-
pelago its place is more or less usurped by two
species of so-called Pintail Snipe (Galiinago stenura
and G. megala), characterised by possessing
respectively twenty-six and twenty tail feathers
(instead of fourteen), and having the outside ones
SNIPE AND THEIR DISTINCTIONS 301

(eight and six on each side respectively) so attenu-
ated as to consist of little more than pin-like shafts
(Fig. 2). In South Africa, Cape Colony, and
Natal the English snipe does not occur, its place
being supplied by a larger and darker species
(Gallinago nigripennis) ; while in Madagascar and
Mauritius is found a remarkably long-billed and

 

TT zal

TAIL FEATHERS OF THE PINTAIL SNIPE,

long-toed Snipe (Gallinago macrodacty/a), in which
the bill measures as much as 34 in. and the toes are
unusually long.

The Common Snipe of North America (Gadiinago
wzlsontt) is so like our English bird as to be scarcely
distinguishable from it, except, it is said, by the
possession of sixteen instead of fourteen tail
feathers, though it is doubtful whether this alleged
peculiarity is constant, or independent of moult.
302 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

In South America there are several species of
snipe, some of which (as G. /venata and G.
paraguaye) so closely resemble our own bird and
Wilson’s Snipe in colour and size, that to the majority
of shooters they appear indistinguishable; while
others (as Gallinago imperialis, jamesont, strick-
landi, undulata, and gigantea) are so conspicuous by

FeeEEOR , =

 

TAIL FEATHERS OF THE GREAT SNIPE.

their larger size and varying plumageas at once to
attract attention.

The largest known Snipe is Galiinago gigantea, a
native of Brazil and Paraguay. It is about double
the size of our bird, being 19 in. in length (instead
of 10 in.), with a bill of 5 in. instead of 2.8 in., wing
6.6 in. instead of 5.3 in., and leg 2.25 in. instead of
9 In,
SNIPE AND THEIR DISTINCTIONS 303

In Australia there is a large Snipe (Galkinago
australis) measuring 11% in., witha wing nearly 14 in.
longer than in our bird, and having eighteen instead
of fourteen tail feathers, the two outermost ones in
their attenuation resembling in character those of
the Pintail Snipe. This bird is double the weight

 

TAIL FEATHERS OF THE JACK SNIPE.

of ours, in that respect coming nearer to the
European Great or Solitary Snipe.

In many parts of the world certain Sandpipers are
commonly called “ Snipe,” sometimes with a distin-
guishing prefix, suchas ‘‘Bay Snipe,” ‘“‘ Pool Snipe,”
etc. The so-called “Jack Snipe” of American
sportsmen is the Pectoral Sandpiper (Z7inga
maculata), while in this country we are accustomed
to hear reports of Jack Snipe breeding on the
304 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

moors in summer, which on inquiry turn out to be
Dunling (Z7znga alpina). Thus it is that the long
bill, long legs, and sharp-pointed wings are con-
sidered as indicating affinity to the Snipes in the
great family Scolopacide, while the true Snipes may
be always recognised by the peculiar colouration of
the dorsal region, as well as by the delicately
sentient bill. This is not only long, slender, and
flexible, but also enlarged towards the extremity,
and has numerons nervous filaments under the
cuticle which, on becoming dry, cause it to look
curiously pitted. This peculiarly-formed bill is
especially suited to enable the owner of it to feel
and seize its food beneath the surface when unable
to see it, a remarkable adaptation of structure to
habit.

Not a bad way of identifying the different
species of Snipe is to examine and compare their
tail feathers. It will be seen from the few examples.
here selected for illustration that there is consider-
able variation not only in the pattern, but also in
the shape and number of the tail feathers. I have
made choice of four species which are most easily
obtainable, in order that my readers may be able to
secure specimens and examine for themselves. It
may be new to some people to find such a difference
in shape in the tail feathers of the Jack Snipe as
compared with those of the common species, while
those who have never handled an example of the
Pintail Snipe will see at a glance what an excellent
distinguishing feature is afforded in the case of
species which in other respects are very similar.
TWENTY YEARS’ SNIPE-SHOOTING

In 1899, at the Knickerbocker Press in New York,
there was printed a remarkable book with the above
title. As it was printed for private circulation only,
and no copies apparently were sent out for review,
it has escaped the notice of critics, and is probably
known to few readers beyond the immediate circle
of the writer’s own friends amongst whom the book
was distributed.

It is a volume of some 300 pages, consisting of
extracts from the journals of the late Mr J. J.
Pringle, a noted American snipe-shooter, and is
illustrated with twenty-four photographs. The
scene is laid at Oaklawn, Bayou Teche, in south-
west Louisiana, where for twenty seasons Mr
Pringle enjoyed some of the finest snipe-shooting
in the world. It is generally believed that the
largest bags of snipe made bya single gun have
been obtained in India, Ceylon, and Egypt, and
the remarkable bags made in Ireland by Colonel
John Peyton, as recorded by Sir R. Payne Gallwey
in his Fowler tx [reland, should not be overlooked ;
but all these are put completely in the shade by
the results obtained in Louisiana by Mr Pringle
between the years 1867-1887, when the country
over which he sported was a perfect paradise for

U 3°5
306 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the snipe-shooter. The ground over which he
shot is thus described :—

‘A few miles from Berwick’s Bay there enters
from the west the Bayou Teche, loveliest of
southern streams, navigable for more than 100
miles, preserving at all seasons an equal depth and
breadth; so gentle in its flow that it might be
taken for a canal, did not the charming and grace-
ful curves by which it separates the undulating
prairies of Attakapas from the alluvium of the
Atchafalaga, mark it as a work of nature. The
Teche waters the parishes of St Mary, New Iberia,
St Martin, Lafayette, and St Landry—the Atta-
kapas home of the Acadians.”

Such was the condition of the country as Mr
Pringle found it in 1867, and as it continued for the
first fifteen or sixteen years of his shooting. It
was, however, quite changed in later years by the
extension of the New Orleans and Opelousas Rail-
way, now called the Southern Pacific, from Berwick’s
Bay, its then terminus, to Franklin, eight miles
from his shooting-box (which he called ‘The
Snipery ”), and afterwards to San Francisco. Then
the prairies and marshes, which previously had
been grazed over by herds of cattle, affording
excellent feeding-ground for snipe, were gradually
fenced, drained, and tilled, and the snipe-grounds
over which he used to shoot were gradually cur-
tailed, and eventually entirely destroyed.

His favourite ground consisted of low-lying
marshes, with a growth of green aquatic weed,
which he called “ blue iris,” bearing a beautiful blue
TWENTY YEARS’ SNIPE-SHOOTING 307

flower in spring, and other water weeds and grasses
affording excellent cover for the birds. Adjacent
to these low marshes, which he called the lower
grounds, about 15 in. to 30 in. above their level,
sloping down to them, with a gradual and almost
imperceptible descent, was a low undulating prairie,
which he called the upper grounds, in the de-
pressions of which also grew the “blue iris” and
various water grasses. The birds were generally
found on the lower grounds in dry weather, or
when there had not been rain enough to submerge
them; but in wet weather, when these lower
marshes were too much flooded, they resorted to
the upper grounds.

The walking, as snipe-shooting goes, was un-
commonly good, so that one could get over the
ground at a good pace, which in a measure accounts
for the large bags that were made, although, of
course, the good shooting must be taken into
account.

When snipe were abundant Mr Pringle kept
his dog—either setter or pointer—at heel, and only
used him to “seek dead,” not to retrieve; for a
dog sent out to retrieve would have put up many
birds which would have gone off, some of them
unshot at. So that by walking to the dead birds
and picking them up himself he got many more
shots. This, of course, gave more walking, but
more shooting. He had an old negro slave who
was a wonderful marker, and it was his business
when birds were rising fast and the shooting was
rapid, to mark down and keep count of the dead
308 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

birds, and then report the number down. Standing
quite still and indicating the spots one after another,
his master would walk to the dead birds and pick
them up. When snipe were numerous he would
sometimes have ten or a dozen down at the same
time, and by pursuing this plan in going from one
to another, by the time he had gathered these he
would perhaps kill several more, the majority of
which would have escaped unshot at if he had sent
a man or dog for them.

Mr Pringle’s modus operandi is so instructive to
snipe-shooters that it deserves to be quoted zz
extenso.

‘On reaching the ground and getting out of the
waggon, I would station it on a ridge, with orders
to keep within signalling distance, and when I re-
quired more cartridges, or my men had as many
birds as they could well carry, I would signal, and
it would come to me as fast as possible. When
birds were abundant I never allowed the dog to
range, for a snipe is a very wild bird, with but little
scent, and a dog, however good and careful, would
flush out of distance many more birds than he
would point.”

‘“When practicable I shot dowz wind, with a
marker or beater walking abreast of me about 15
yards off; with two beaters, one on each side of
me, I would have the waggon meet me to leeward,
and when I got to the end of the beat I would drive
over the ground I had just beaten, so as not to
disturb the rest of it, and take another parallel beat
down wind, and so on until I had shot all that
TWENTY YEARS’ SNIPE-SHOOTING 309

ground out. Oftener, however, I would begin on
the weather side of the ground, and beat across wind.
My beaters, if I had more than one, were then
both to leeward of me, the one next to me about 15
yards off and somewhat behind me, the other the
same distance from the first and a little behind him.
So, as snipe on rising generally fly to wexdward, |
got shots at the birds rising, not only before me,
but before my beaters. This would give me
longer shots, but more of them. In shooting wp
winad—which, from the lay of the ground, I some-
times found it convenient to do—my marker would
walk on a parallel line with me, about 15 yards off
and well behind—the wilder the birds the farther
behind ; with two beaters, one on each side of me,
I walked well ahead. Indeed, I reduced the shoot-
ing of these grounds to a system (to which to a
certain extent was due my large bags), so as to get
each day as many birds as possible in as short a
time as possible.”

What these bags were like may be seen from
the following extracts from the journal which was
carefully posted up each day on return from shoot-
ing; the season commencing on November 1, and
ending about the middle of March.

The best six consecutive shooting days, witha
rest between, were experienced in November 1874.
Thus: November 19, 207; November 21, 214;
November 23, 228; November 25, 301; November
27, 208; November 30, 256; total for the six days,
1414. In seven days in December 1887 the bags
were 270, 255, 366, 271, 286, 233, and 262; total 1943.
310 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Over 300 a day were killed on three occasions,
making 972 in the three days. Over 200 a day
were killed on twenty-six days, making in all 6378,
and 100 and upwards were bagged on 285 days,
giving a total of 40,367 snipe. During the twenty
seasons’ snipe-shooting, from 1867 to 1887, the
following extraordinary result was obtained :—

 

 

 

Season. pees Snipe. Season. eas Snipe.
1867-68 24 1861 1878-79 29 3085
1868-69 38 3645 1879-80 31 2434
1869-70 40 4091 1880-81 47 3493
1870-71 30 3412 1881-82 39 3238
1871-72 37 4142 1882-83 4I 2521
1872-73 23 2006 1883-84 49 3734
1873-74 32 3100 1884-85 27 2403
1874-75 42 6615 | 1885-86 48 3744
1875-76 42 5048 1886-87 26 2085
1876-77 28 3116

1877-78 38 5314 |20seasons| 711 days | 69,087 snipe

 

 

 

 

 

 

It only remains to add a few of Mr Pringle’s re-
marks on the guns used, powder and shot.

‘‘For a few seasons I shot with guns of Lang,
Purdey, and Grant; afterwards altogether with
Purdey’s hammer cylinder; then (when they came
in) with hammerless choked—the perfection of guns
in my opinion—they shot so hard, wore so well, and
handled so beautifully as to leave nothing to be
desired, weighing 6 Ib. 10 oz. As to shot, No. 9
chilled shot was used, sometimes No. 8 for the left
barrel; I stuck to black powder for a long time, for
I always had a feeling that it shot stronger.
Eventually, however, I used Schultz, though to the
end | occasionally used black for the second barrel.
TWENTY YEARS’ SNIPE-SHOOTING 311

I shot with only one gun at a time, and had no
loader. From much practice I became very expert
and quick in loading. Keeping the cartridges
loose in an open pocket, I could slip them in with
great rapidity.”

Though much exposed to wet and cold, this
intrepid sportsman was never prevented from
shooting by ailment of any kind, except once, in
the season of 1878-1879, when he had a severe attack
of rheumatic gout, complicated with malaria, but
that did not prevent his killing that season 3085
snipe in twenty-nine days.

Mr Pringle’s journal is a remarkable one, and
snipe-shooters into whose hands it may chance to
fall will do well to peruse it, and profit by the
writer’s experience, though they can never hope to
meet with his success.
CRANES AT CHRISTMAS

Amoncst the many good things with which our
forefathers were wont to stock their larders at
Christmas time were Cranes, and reference to some
of the “ household books ” of the Middle Ages shows
that, although these birds were generally regarded
as delicacies, there was no apparent difficulty in pro-
curing them in England for those who were able to
pay for them. Thus, in the Vorthuméberland House-
hold Book, for example (1512), we find the steward’s
entry, ‘‘It is thought that cranys must be hadde at
Crystynmas and other principall feestes for my
lordes owne mees, so they be boght at xvjd. a pece,”
a sum in those days equivalent, perhaps, to half as
many shillings of our money. Indeed, at one time,
if we are to credit the old chroniclers, Cranes were
common enough in England to afford abundant
sport to falconers, fowlers, and shooters with the
cross-bow, by each and all of whom, if masters of
their craft, they were easily taken. It is chiefly to
the scattered records of such sport, and to the
entries of payments made by the stewards of great
and noble households, that the naturalist must
turn who would collect materials for a history of the
Crane in England.

Perhaps one of the earliest notices of the Crane
312
CRANES AT CHRISTMAS gre

asa British bird, is that which carries us back to
Saxon times, and occurs in a letter addressed by
King Ethelbert to Boniface, Archbishop of Mayence,
who died in 755. In this letter, a copy of which
has been preserved, the king asked him to send
over two falcons that would do to fly at the Crane ;
for, said he, “there are very few birds of use for
this flight in this country’”—that is, in Kent. In
other words, there were Cranes enough in Kent in
those days to afford sport to a falconer, but no
hawks powerful enough to take them. He wanted
Jerfalcons.

It is related of William the Conqueror, who was
a great gourmand in his way, that on one occasion,
when at dinner, William Fitz-Osborne, who, as
dapifer, or steward of the household, had the charge
of the curey, served him with the flesh of a Crane
scarcely half roasted. The king was so vexed,
that he raised his fist and would have struck him,
had not Eudo, who was appointed dapifer im-
mediately afterwards warded off the blow."

In the twelfth century Cranes were reported to
be very common in Ireland. Giraldus Cambrensis,
who travelled there in 1183, and again in 1185-1186,
in company with Prince John, noted in his journal
(Zopographia Hibernica, ed. Dimock, M.R. series,
p. 46) that they were so numerous, that as many as
a hundred or thereabouts might often be seen in
one flock. This is also recorded by Ranulphus

1 Peoge’s Form of Curey: a Roll of Ancient English Cookery.
1780. See also Warner’s Axtiguitates Culinari@ ; or, Curious
Tracts relating to the Culinary Affairs of the old English, 4to.

1791.
314 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Higden (who died about 1360) in his Polychronicon,
and by his translator, John of Trevisa, who lived
AD, 1357-1387"

King John was very fond of hawking, and it is
recorded of him that he used to have great sport
flying at Cranes with Jerfalcons, which he received
from Philip, King of Norway. He used to hawk
in Dorsetshire, Somersetshire, Lincolnshire, and
Cambridgeshire, as appears by entries in the court
rolls of the expenses of the journeys. On one
occasion, at Ashwell, in Cambridgeshire, in
December 1212, he killed seven Cranes with his
hawks, at which he was so pleased, that for every
Crane he feasted fifty paupers, and gave each of
them a penny. On another occasion, in Lincoln-
shire, he took no less than nine Cranes with his
Jerfalcons, and, in the joy of his heart, regaled the
poor in the neighbourhood with bread, meat, and
ale.

Nor are these exceptional instances. Edward L.,
in 1276, received some Jerfalcons from the King
of Norway, which were trained to fly at Cranes and
Herons; and in the Wardrobe Accounts of that
monarch, under date January 5, 1298, occurs the entry
of a payment to Alexander Coo, the king’s falconer,
for presenting to the king three Cranes taken in
Cambridgeshire by the Jerfalcons of Sir Geoffrey
de Hautville.

Leland, in his Codlectanea, has printed, from an
old paper roll, the bill of fare at a great feast which

1 See Higden’s, Polychronicon, ed. Babington, M. R. series,
vol. i. pp. 334; 335:
CRANES AT CHRISTMAS Z15

was given at the enthronisation of Archbishop
Nevill in Edward IV.’s time. From this it
appears that, amongst the various wildfowl then
served up, there were no less than 204 Cranes.

Fosbrooke tells us, in his Excyclopedia of
Antiquities (vol. 11. p. 1014), that it was a custom
in the Middle Ages to keep tame Cranes, which
stood before the table at dinner, and even kneeled
and bowed the head when a bishop gave the
benediction! Whether it is possible they could
have been made so tractable as this, we will not
pretend to say: but there seems to be no doubt
that they were kept in courtyards and about the
houses formerly, just as peafowl are kept at the
present day. Occasionally they may be found
mentioned in old inventories of live stock, taken on
the death of their owners. Thus, in an inventory
of Mr Serjeant Keble’s goods, dated July 6, 1500,
after an enumeration of his cattle, sheep, and
horses, we find three swans valued at tos., two geese
at 3s. 4d., and three cranes at 5s.

This would seem to be a liberal valuation, if we
may judge by the price paid in October 1502, when
as appears from Zhe Wardrobe Accounts of
Elizabeth of York (daughter of Edward IV. and
consort of Henry VII.), the sum paid to a servant
of Sir John Longes for a Crane was xijd. But
perhaps this was only a douceur, and did not
represent the market value of the bird, which
seems to have varied considerably. Thus in the
Flousehold Book of the lEstranges of Hunstanton
(A.D. 1519-1578) occur the items :—
316 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

‘519. Itm. pd. for a crane and vj plovs, xxd.

“1526. The xxxixth weke. Itm. iiij malards
and a crane kylled wt. the crossbowe.

‘1533. The xxvjth weke. Thursdaye. Itm. a
crane, vjd.

“1533. The xxxviijth weke. Tewysdaye. Itm.
a crane kylled wt. the gun.”

In the Northumberland Household Book (1512),
already quoted, the price of a Crane is set down at
““xvjd. a pece.” At a feast, given in the Inner
Temple Hall, on the 16th of October 1555, the
price given for a Crane was the same as fora Swan
and Bustard—namely xs., pheasants and turkeys
being charged at iiijs. each; while in the Lord
North’s “ accounts ” (1577), one Crane is charged at
xiijs. lijd., a Heron at the same period being only
valued at iljs.

Before this time, however, it would seem that
Cranes were getting scarce in England, and in 1534
it had become necessary to pass an Act, quaintly
entituled ““An Act to avoide Distruction of Wilde
Fowle,” whereby it was made illegal, between the
first day of March and the last day of June, to take
or destroy the eggs of any wildfowl on pain of
imprisonment for a year, and a forfeit for every egg
of a Crane or Bustard twenty pence, for every egg
ofa Bittern, Heron, or Shovelard (z.e., Spoonbill)
eightpence, and for every egg of a Mallard, Teal, or
other wildfowl a penny, half the penalty going to
the king, and the other half to the informer.

The breeding haunts of the Crane in England
were chiefly, if not exclusively, in the fens of the
CRANES AT CHRISTMAS 317

eastern counties ; and for some time after the pass-
ing of the Wildfowl Act of 1534 these birds seemed
to have held their ground in East Anglia. Turner,
in his AWvstorza Avitum, printed in 1548, tells us
that he himself had often seen the young ones,
presumably in the fens near Cambridge, where, as
we learn from Cooper’s Athene Cantabrigienses, he
was educated, and lived for about fifteen years.

In alist of fen-birds forwarded as presents by
Mr Balam, ‘‘out of marshland in Norfolk,” on the
occasion of the wedding of the daughter of Mr
Moor, of Losely, in 1567 (printed in vol. xxxvi. of
the Archezologia) we find ‘Cranes ix.”; and that this
name was not intended to refer to the Heron (as it
does in many parts of the country at the present day,
especially in Wales and Ireland), is evident from
the circumstance that, in the same list, the latter
bird is also particularly mentioned—‘‘ Hernshawes
v.” Dr Thomas Muffett, who lived in Wiltshire, at
Bulbridge, near Wilton, where he died in 1590,
wrote a curious little book entitled, Health's Lmprove-
ment, wherein he set down the results of various
experiments which he made on the gastronomic
properties of the flesh of different kinds of game
and wildfowl which were found in England in his
day, and which he had tasted, adding at the same
time brief remarks on the haunts in which they were
to be found. He testifies to the fact that ‘‘ Cranes
breed (as old Dr Turner writ unto Gesner) not
only in the northern countreys, but also in our
English fens.” He adds: “Pliny saith that in
Italy they feed much upon grapes ; but with us they
318 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

feed chiefly on grain, and fenny seeds or bents.”
No wonder, then, that they were esteemed good
eating, far superior in flavour to the Heron.

Drayton, in his Polyolbzon (25th song), describes
“the stately Crane” as a characteristic fen-bird in
the early part of the seventeenth century (1622);
and Sir Thomas Browne, writing towards the close
of the same century (about 1667) an account of the
birds of Norfolk, includes the Crane as “ often seen
here in hard winters, especially about the champain
and fieldy parts”; from which it would appear
that, at that date, this bird had ceased to breed in
England. ‘It seems,” he says, “they have been
more plentiful ; for in a bill of fare, when the mayor
entertained the Duke of Norfolk, I met with Cranes
in a dish.”

Willughby, in his Orxzthology (1678), writing of
this bird, says : ‘‘ They come often to us in England ;
and in the fen-countries in Lincolnshire and Cam-
bridgeshire there are great flocks of them” (a state-
ment repeated in the posthumously printed Syzopszs
Avium of John Ray, 1713; “ but whether or no they
breed in England (as Aldrovandus writes he was
told by a certain Englishman” [Dr Turner above
mentioned ], ‘‘who said he had often seen their young
ones), I cannot certainly determine, either of my
own knowledge, or from the relation of any credible
person.” Headds: “ The delicate taste of the flesh
and the musculous stomach are sufficient arguments
to evince that this bird feeds not at all upon fish,
but only upon herbs, grain, and seeds of divers
sorts, and it is likely upon insects too, as the
CRANES AT CHRISTMAS 319

authors also that have written of it unanimously
report.”

It may be safely asserted, then, that the Crane
has not been known to breed in England for more
than two centuries. The drainage of their haunts in
the fens, and the introduction of shoulder guns,
with which they could be killed more easily and
frequently than with the crossbow or with hawks,
hawking also being then on the decline in England,
are the causes which have no doubt chiefly operated
to banish this fine bird from our island. It is now
only met with as an occasional visitor in winter, or
during the periods of its migration in spring and
autumn.

We are no longer able to look forward at
Christmas time to the appearance of a Crane “‘in a
dish,” but it is interesting to glance over the records
which have come down to us, testifying to its
former abundance, and the estimation in which it
was once held.
THE FASCINATION OF LIGHT

Few observers can have failed to notice the
fascination and attraction which is exercised upon
the lower animals at night by the exhibition of a light.
Familiar examples of this are seen in the flocking
of migratory birds towards a lighthouse, and the
advent of moths to a lamp or candle. This has
been so long and so well known, that hunters,
fowlers, and fishermen have all taken advantage of
it, each in his own way, to lure their respective
quarry —a method, it must be confessed, which
savours more of poaching than of true sport.
Readers of American books on hunting in bygone
days will recall descriptions of the way in which
deer were enticed within rifle shot by showing a
light, towards which they would slowly and timidly
advance to their destruction. ‘‘ Bat-fowling,”
which the old books define as ‘‘ the taking by night
of all manner of birds, great and small, which
roost in shrubs and bushes,” is thus described in
The Gentleman's Recreation, 1697 :—

‘You must be very silent till your lights are
blazing, and you may either carry nets or none;
if none, you must have long poles, with great bushy
tops fixed to them; and having from a cresset, or

vessel to carry fire in, lighted your straw or other
320
THE FASCINATION OF LIGHT = 321

combustible matter, then must you beat those
bushes where you think birds are at roost; which
done, if there be any there, you will instantly see
them fly about the flames. For it is their nature
through their amazedness at the strangeness of the
light and extreme darkness round about it, not to
depart from it. They will even scorch their wings
in the same, so that those who have the bushy
poles may beat them down as they please.”

The Indians of Washington territory, depend-
ing largely upon fish and wildfowl for their sub-
sistence, used formerly to kill ducks at night with
spears by the light of a fire kindled in a boat.
This was occupied by two men, one to use the
spear, the other to paddle; the process is now
varied by using a gun instead of a spear.

In France, a popular method in Burgundy of
killing wildfowl was by means of a metal reflector
or véverbére. It was usually in the shape of a
copper pan suspended from the neck of the
operator, who caused the flame of several oil wicks
to be reflected by the copper on the surface of the
water, when the wildfow] swimming into the light
were shot. Labruyére, a French writer on the
wiles of poaching, who assisted at such a proceed-
ing on the banks of the Durance, states that he
saw fifteen ducks shot in this way in one evening.’

Similarly, with the aid of fire, are salmon killed
in Scotland by the process known to river poachers
as ‘burning the water.” It has been thus
described by an eye-witness :—

1 Labruyere, Les Ruses de Braconnage.
x
322 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

“One evening, between eight and nine o'clock
on the river Lyne, we saw the river poachers
‘burning the water.’ The party consisted of four
men, one with a crwzsze (cruse or cresset), a sort of
portable grate, made of iron hoops, with a long
handle, in which was some sacking saturated with
paraffin oil, the blaze of which might rival the
electric light. Another, with a ¢hree-taed letster (a
three-pronged fork, or trident, used for striking
fish), waded up stream in company with the one
carrying the light, while the other two, with sacks,
walked on each side of the river carrying the spoil.
Occasionally the light became stationary, as a fish
was seen on the spawning-bed, and in an instant
the victim, wriggling on the spear, was forked to
the nearest bank. ”

The above instances—and others might be
mentioned—serve to show how universally, through
man’s agency, the lower animals are influenced and
attracted by a strong light ; and the question arises
whether there are any instances in nature of wild
creatures emitting a phosphorescent light, or
presenting a flame-coloured surface for the purpose
of attracting and alluring their prey. Setting aside
the case of the glow-worm, in which the exhibition
of a light serves a very different purpose—the
congress of the sexes—there is reason to believe
that the question may be answered in the
affirmative; and the subject is a very interesting
one. But in order to confine the inquiry within
reasonable limits, and not to mention species which
are not readily observable (as, for example,
THE FASCINATION OF LIGHT 323

luminous marine fishes, of which many species are
known to exist), it will suffice to mention one or
two common birds, which may be studied by any-
one who will take the trouble to look for them in
their proper haunts. For instance, the Heron and
the Kingfisher.

Many years ago the late Edward Jesse, in the
second series of his Gleanings in Natural History,
wrote (p. 285): “It has been supposed that a
light is emitted by Herons from their breast as they
stand in the water of an evening waiting for fish.
I should like to be assured of the accuracy of this
supposition.” A phosphorescent light is, of course,
intended. Strange to say, hardly any information
on this point is forthcoming, notwithstanding the
number of books and articles which have been
published from time to time on the subject of
phosphorescence in animals and plants, the animals
dealt with being chiefly fishes, marine invertebrates,
and insects. Now it must have been often a matter
for speculation with naturalists how the Heron,
when fishing on a dark evening, especially during
the winter months and in the bed of a stream over-
hung with bushes, contrives to see and stab with
his long beak the fish he so patiently waits for.
Can there be any truth in the supposition that
certain portions of the plumage are luminous at
night, whereby the bird is enabled to illumine the
water over a small area in front of it sufficiently to
see any fish within that area, and to use the light
as.alure? If so, the question arises what part, or
parts, of the plumage are likely to harbour phos-
324 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

phorescent particles. I have long entertained the
notion that the alleged luminosity of the breast
feathers of the heron is correlated with the so-
called ‘‘powder-down patches” which have been
described as existing not only in the European
and American Herons and Bitterns, but in the Night
Heron (NVycticorax), Sun-Bittern (Zurypyga), Boat-
bill (Cochlearius), Shoe-billed Stork (Baleniceps),
Kaku (Rhznochetus), and other marsh-loving birds
which are of crepuscular or nocturnal habits. These
powder-down patches—so called from the powder
which is produced by the pulverising of the barbs
of the feathers as fast as they develop—vary con-
siderably in the area of the tracts they cover, as
well as in their position. The Bitterns have two
pairs, the Herons three (one in front of the breast
and one on each side of the hips between the
hips and the tail), while the Boatbill—so called
from the singular shape of the upper mandible,
which resembles a boat, keel uppermost—has four
pairs. It is true they are found in some other
birds which do not fish at night, and are placed,
not on the ventral, but on the dorsal surface. In
this case they probably subserve some other
purpose, ¢.g., to enable the sexes to find each
other in the dark.

As to the evidence that these curious tracts are
luminous at night—that is to say, that the powder-
down is phosphorescent—it must be admitted that

1 Messrs Sheppard and Whitear, in their account of Norfolk
Birds (1824-1825), noticed that the feathers of the Heron are
“frequently loaded with a blue powder.” In the American
species the powder is said to be yellow.
i
Wy,

:

ey

2

 

A HERON FISHING.
326 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

it is not overwhelming, but such as it is, in the
case of the Heron at least, it is sufficiently con-
vincing. An American sportsman writes :—

‘‘One evening, the moon having gone down,
leaving me in the dark, I was making my way
to my boat, when suddenly I perceived on the
sands several dim lights, and when almost upon
them, there came a flapping of wings, while above
I saw indistinctly the forms of several large cranes
(a name given to the Large Blue Heron of America,
Ardea herodias). The light disappeared with them,
and my opinion is that what I saw was phos-
phorescent light on the breast of the birds.”

Mr C. F. Holder, who mentions this incident
in his book on phosphorescent animals and plants,’
adds the following comment :—

‘I have been told by several sportsmen that
they have heard of such an occurrence, and I have
always been impressed with the belief that the
greasy, oily, powder-down patches might become
luminous under certain conditions, but never until
the present year have I been able to find reliable
personal testimony.”

He then proceeds to give at some length the
evidence referred to, which may be shortly stated
as follows: Mr J. W. Worrall, of Philadelphia,
being out wildfowling in Kansas on a clear, dark
night, saw four lights, one of which he approached.
He could see it plainly at the distance of 50 yards ;
it reminded him of phosphorescent wood, and was

1 Living Lights: A Popular Account of Phosphorescent Animals
and Vegetables. 8vo. London, 1887.
THE FASCINATION OF LIGHT 327

whitish. While slowly creeping towards it, he saw
it disappear four times at intervals of about twenty
seconds, from which he inferred that the bird (for
such it proved to be) has the light under control,
and governs it by raising or depressing the feathers
that cover the powder down patches. When he
fired at the bird the light on the breast was so
intense that he distinctly saw the sight of his gun
against it. The bird—a Great Blue Heron—fell
where it was standing in 6 inches of water, and,
taking it by the wings, he threw it on the shore,
noticing three phosphorescent spots, one in front,
and one on each side of the hips between the hips
and the tail. The bird died slowly, the light gradu-
ally dying out, and disappearing entirely with death.

This fact is of great interest, showing, as Mr
Holder observes, that the phosphorescence is not
an accidental occurrence, depending upon a favour-
able condition of the greasy powder-down patches,
or associated entirely with their decomposition, but
is essentially due to some physiological action, and
dependent upon the life of the bird; and the areas
of the powder-down patches may be considered true
photogenic structures. The bird shot as above
stated was the Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias),
popularly known to American gunners as the “ Blue
Crane,” and the other birds in which the light was
observed were Night Herons (Wyctzcorax nevius).
The light was in the so-called powder-down patches,
which we may reasonably assume in all these birds
serve to attract the fish on which they prey. It
would be of great interest if any of our English
328 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

wildfowlers would confirm from their own experience
the observations made in America.

It remains to notice another and different kind
of lure employed by our own Kingfisher, as I have
frequently observed, but of which I have never seen
any mention in books. Lying on the grass by the
side of a Thames backwater, I have watched a King-
fisher, flying down stream at full speed, suddenly
“fling up,” and remain hovering like a Kestrel with
rapidly moving wings. As the bird in that position
was facing me, I could see only the orange-coloured
breast and the under surfaces of the wings, which
are also orange. In this position the bird presented
the appearance of a quivering flame or cresset. It
remained thus hovering for, perhaps, five or six
seconds, and then dropped like a stone into the
water, recovered a fish, and flew down stream with
it, to perch on some post or rail, on which it would
rap the fish three or four times smartly, as if to stun
it, and then swallow it whole. Never till then did
I appreciate the significance of the Kingfisher’s
orange breast and the orange lining to the wings.
It might be fancy, but it seemed to me asif the
bird, on spying a shoal of small fish, showed his
light, and as soon as a fish drew towards him it was
struck like lightning and carried off. This is not
the invariable mode of fishing adopted by the King-
fisher ; it will frequently sit motionless ona rail or
bough overhanging the water, waiting for a chance
to descend on an approaching fish towards which
its orange breast is directed.

Another fishing bird, which takes its prey by
THE FASCINATION OF LIGHT 329

first hovering and then descending suddenly upon
it, is the Osprey ; but as it fishes by day, hovers at
a considerable height like a Kestrel, and has a white
lining to the wings, its mode of procedure is not
comparable to that of the Heron or the Kingfisher,

 

A KINGFISHER HOVERING.

for it has not the fame-coloured breast of the latter,
nor has it been shown to have the powder-down of
the former. Nevertheless, it was anciently believed
to exercise some sort of fascination over the fish,
allusion to which may be found in the works of
Shakespeare and other dramatists of the Elizabethan
age. But the story is too long to be here discussed.
THE LARGEST BIRDS THAT FLY

Ir the subject of inquiry were the largest bird that
ever lived, there can be little doubt that the palm
would have to be awarded to the extinct New
Zealand Moa (Dinornis maximus), of which the
total height was about Io feet, the tibia, or thigh
bone, measuring a yard in length. But this bird,
like all the members of its genus, and like the
Apteryx, Emu, Cassowary, Rhea, and Ostrich,
which survive at the present day, was incapable of
flight, and, therefore, for the present purpose need
not be compared with those presently to be noticed.
As, however, there is some conflict of opinion as to
the probable height of the largest species of Moa,
and a variation in the statements as to length of
tibia in Dinornts maximus, it may be of interest
en passant to refer to it. According to Messrs
Nicholson and Lydekker (Manual of Paleontology,
3rd_edit., 1889), the height (as above stated) was
10 feet, and the length of tibia 3 feet In Professor
Newton’s admirable Ductionary of Birds (art.
‘“Moa”) it is stated that Dinornuzs maximus is the
largest of all the species, having a tibia measuring
39 in., and probably reaching a height of 12 feet
The former statement having been published
in 1889, and the latter in 1894, suggests as a pos-
33°
THE LARGEST BIRDS THAT FLY 331

sible explanation that between those dates a longer
tibia (3 in. longer) came to hand, from which the
increase in height of 2 feet was inferred; but the
proportions in inches would be—36: 39:: 120: 130,
that is to say, the specimen with a tibia of 3 feet 3 in.
would measure only 10 feet 10 in. in height, instead
of 12 feet, as mentioned in the Dictionary quoted.

But this by the way. The problem I will now
try to solve (and it is one of some little interest) is,
‘‘Which is the largest existing bird that flies?”
The question is by no means easily answered
offhand. Ninety-nine persons out of a hundred
who are not naturalists would probably infer, from
the marvellous stories they have read of lambs,
kids, and even children being carried off by it, that
the Lammergeier, or Bearded Vulture (Gypaetus
barbatus) must be unquestionably the largest liv-
ing bird that flies. Those who have travelled in
Peru and Chili would doubtless maintain that the
South American Condor (Sarcorhamphus gryphus)
must surely exceed it in size; while passengers who
have made a voyage to the Cape, or to the Falkland
Islands, will feel convinced that no bird at the
present day has a greater expanse of wing than the
Wandering Albatross (Dzomedia exulans). It is not
possible to settle these rival claims without having
recourse to actual measurement. ‘Estimated ”
expanse of wing is for our purpose useless; hearsay
evidence must be discarded. What we want are
facts, first hand, from those who have actually taken
measurements and ascertained weights, or seen
them taken by others in their presence.
332 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

If length of body from tip of beak to end of tail,
expanse of wing measured between the extended
tips, and weight of dead bird are to be taken as a
test of size, it will probably surprise many persons.
to learn that the Lammergeier is not the largest
bird of prey in Europe, and that quite as large, and
somewhat heavier a rival has visited the British
Islands within the memory of those now living. I
refer to the great Griffon Vulture (Gyps fulvus), a
specimen of which, as related in Yarrell’s Brztzshk
Birds, was captured in 1843 near Cork Har-
bour.

This huge bird, when adult, measures from tip
of beak to end of tail from 3 feet 10 in. to 4 feet 1 in.
according to sex (the females, as with most birds
of prey, being larger than the males); the expanse
of wing is from 8 feet 10 in. to 9 feet 2 in., and the
weight from 18 lb. to 20 lb.

Not much inferior in point of size, though
somewhat less in weight, is the Cinereous Vulture
(Vultur monachus), the male of which attains a
length of 3 feet 6 in. and the female 3 feet 9 in., with
an expanse of wing varying from 8 feetto 9 feet 10 in.,
according to age and sex, and an average weight of
about 14 Ib., the female bird being a pound or two
heavier.

An inquisitive reader may here inquire how do
these weights compare with those of the eagles
which dwell in Scotland and the Isles, as well as in
Ireland, and are met with from time to time in
England on migration, generally in autumn.

Animmature Golden Eagle from Loch Gair, ob-
THE LARGEST BIRDS THAT FLY 333

tained in the month of August, weighed 94 lb., and
measured between the extended wings 6 feet 7 in.
Another two-year-old bird, procured in Ross-shire
in September 1897, weighed 11 lb. ; a third, killed
at Kylemore Castle, Galway, in October 1889,
weighed 124 lb. An immature White-tailed or Sea
Eagle, shot at Brighton, weighed 10 1b.; another,
killed at Arundel, barely 10 lb.; while a fine old
bird in fully adult plumage, from Stornoway, Lewis,
weighed no less than 164 1b. This is the heaviest
White-tailed Eagle of which I have any note. It
has been referred to by Robert Gray (Lzrds of the
West of Scotland, p. 17) as being in the collection of
Sir James Matheson, Bart., of Stornoway, and the
finest British example of the Sea Eagle he had
ever seen. He adds, ‘‘compared with three or four
other Sea Eagles in the same collection, its size,
indeed, appears quite extraordinary, and had the
specimen been darker in colour it might have
readily been mistaken for the Northern Sea Eagle
of Pallas.”

It might be supposed that the Imperial Eagle
would be larger and heavier than the Golden Eagle,
but from actual comparison this does not appear to be
so. Thusthe Golden Eagle measures 3 feet to 3 feet
4in. in length, 6 feet 6 in. to 7 feet 6 in. in expanse
of wing, and weighs from g lb. to 12 |b., while the
Imperial Eagle measures only 2 feet 6 in. to 3 feet in
length, 6 feet 4 in. to 7 feet 1 in. in expanse of wing,
and weighs on an average from 6 Ib. to 8} lb.

As for the Lammergeier, it will be found on
comparison of measurements and weights, that
334 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

while in expanse of wing it measures no more than
an adult Griffon Vulture (8 feet 3 in. to 9 feet 2 in.),
its weight may be several pounds less.

Captain Hutton, writing of the Lammergeier as
observed by him in the Himalayas, remarks :—

‘* Marvellous indeed are the stories told both by
natives and Europeans of the destructive habits of
this bird, and both accounts I fully believe have
scarcely a grain of truth in them. All I can
positively say upon the point, however, is that |
have known the bird well in its native haunts for
thirty years and more, and never once in all that
time have I seen it stoop to anything but a dead
carcase. As to carrying off hens, dogs, lambs, or
children, I say the feat would be utterly impossible,
for the creature does not possess the strongly-
curved, sharp-pointed claws of the eagle, but the
far straighter and perfectly blunt talons of the
vulture.”

Mr R. Thomson also, after close and constant
observation of the habits of the Lammergeier for
twelve years, writes :—

‘“‘T have never seen them attack or come down
to a living animal. They have repeatedly sailed
past close to my nets when I have had live fowls
and pigeons picketed as lures for hawks and eagles.
They have passed within a few feet of these with-
out once showing a desire to pick up any of the
birds; and this, too, on the tops of high mountains
in a perfectly wild country, with no human habita-
tion within miles. On the other hand, they will at
once come down ona well-cleaned carcase, a heap
THE LARGEST BIRDS THAT FLY § 335

of bones, or the skeletons of smaller mammalia.!
There must, of course, be some foundation (he
adds) for the many statements that have been put
forth as to the rapacious character of this bird.
But this foundation I believe to consist in the
natives constantly attributing the depredations
committed by eagles to the Lammergeier.”

As to the weight which the larger eagles can

 

THE LAMMERGEIER.

carry in the shape of prey, the writer last quoted
says “the Golden Eagle will kill and carry off young
deer (z.e., fawns) and kids, as I have myself seen.
One, at Strathmore, in Caithness, while devouring

1This does not quite accord with the remarks of Mr Abel
Chapman, who, in his delightful book, Wild Spatn, p. 314,
quotes Manuel de la Torre, the best field naturalist in Spain, to
the effect that the Lammergeier takes young lambs and kids, and
that he shot one in the act of eating a rabbit which he had just
seen it kill.
336 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the carcase of a mountain hare, was attacked by a
fox ; a fight ensued, and after a severe struggle, in
which the fox got badly torn by the eagle’s talons,
and the bird got severely bitten in the breast; the
eagle, to save itself, took flight, with the fox hold-
ing on, until, at a considerable height in the air, the
latter dropped to the ground and was killed by the
fall.” Mr Robert Gray, the author of The Birds of
the West of Scotland, took pains to verify this
story.

Mr Baillie Grohman, writing on chamois-stalking
in the Tyrol, and referring to the natural enemies
of the Chamois, says the full-grown eagles (Stezx
adler or Golden Eagle) are of immense size, measur-
ing from 8 feet to 8} feet from tip to tip of their wings.
It is said that one of these birds will take up a
Chamois bodily and carry it off to its young, and in
support of this statement he quotes the following
extract from his diary :—

“June 27, 1871.—When taking out a young
eagle from the Falknervaud, near Johanneslaus,
I found in the nest (which was quite inaccessible ex-
cept by means of a 50-fathom rope) the half-devoured
carcase of a full-grown chamois, three pairs of 7 in.
chamois’ horns, and the corresponding bones of the
animals, one pair of goat horns, the remains of a
mountain hare, and the head of a roe-deer fawn.”

Mr A. O. Hume, writing of Pallas’s Sea Eagle,
says -—

‘A Grey Goose will weigh on the average 7 |b.
(much heavier are recorded), but I have repeatedly
seen good-sized grey geese carried off in the claws
THE LARGEST BIRDS THAT FLY 337

of one of these eagles, the bird flying slowly and
low over the surface of the water, but still quite
steadily.”

He once saw an eagle of this species on the
river Jumna capture a fish so large that the bird
only with difficulty succeeded in reaching a low
sandbank in the river with its prey. As it made
for this bank it flew so low, and with such difficulty,
that the writhing fish in its claws struck the water
every few yards, and twice seemed likely to pull its
persecutor under water. On reaching the sand-
bank some 250 yards distant from the observer, a
shot from his rifle caused it to quit the fish, which
was then recovered and found to bea Carp (Cyprinus
vohita), weighing over 13 l|b., that is, considerably
heavier than its captor. For the reasons above
given, such a feat would be impossible for the
Lammergeier.

Come we now to the Condor of South America,
a bird which is known to have a wide geographical
range. It is found on the west coast, from the
Strait of Magellan along the Cordillera as far as
eight degrees north of the equator. The steep
cliff near the mouth of the Rio Negro is its northern
limit on the Patagonian coast, and they have there
wandered about 400 miles from the great central
line of their habitation in the Andes. Further
south, among the bold precipices at the head of
Port Desire, the Condor is not uncommon; yet
only a few stragglers occasionally visit the sea
coast. A line of cliff near the mouth of the Santa
Cruz, Patagonia, is frequented by these birds, and

x
338 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

about eighty miles up the river, where the sides of
the valley are formed by steep basaltic precipices,
the Condor reappears. From these facts, says
Darwin, from whom I quote (Waturalist’s Voyage
Round the World, p. 182), it seems that the Condors
require perpendicular cliffs. In Chili they haunt
during the greater part of the year the lower
country near the shores of the Pacific, and at night
several roost together in one tree; but in the early
part of summer they retire to the most inaccessible
parts of the inner Cordillera, there to breed in
peace. As regards the expanse of wing in the
Condor, there appears to be some conflict of testi-
mony, although it may well be that the discrepancy
in the measurements which have been recorded is
due to the fact that they were taken from birds of
different ages and sexes. Thus, in the journal
above quoted, under date April 27, 1834, at Santa
Cruz, Patagonia, Darwin writes: “This day I shot
a Condor. It measured from tip to tip of the wings
84 feet, and from beak to tail 4 feet.” From measure-
ments supplied by others it would appear that this
was quite a small one. In Ecuador, for example,
the largest seen by Mr Edward Whymper measured
10 feet 6 in. from tip to tip of extended wings,
although he remarked that most of those seen at
Antisana and elsewhere were not so much as 9 feet
(Zravels in the Andes). The experience of Captain
George Byam, the author of Wanderings tn some of
the Western Republics of America, is instructive on
the subject of Condors. He saw many which
measured 12 feet in expanse of wing, and one of
THE LARGEST BIRDS THAT FLY 339

13 feet, while the largest out of several which he
shot in Chili measured exactly 15 feet from tip to tip
when pulled out fairly and not too hard. “It was,”
he says, ‘‘a very powerful, heavy bird, with legs
almost as thick as my wrist, and the middle claw or
finger, which I kept, was 7 in. in length.” Mr N.
E. Bieber, writing in the /ze/d of February 11,

 

Dia Se SoM LD oe we OLE EP IEEE ALP BEII D0 0h LEI VEY LEESAE DPT EEE EE EEE

THE CONDOR.

1899, on “Deer Shooting in Bolivia,” remarks
incidentally that a good-sized male Condor will
measure 15 feet across the wings, thus confirming
the observation long previously made by Captain
Byam, a good sportsman and accurate writer.

Dr Robert Cunningham, in his Matural Hrstory
of the Strait of Magellan (1871), describing an
exploration of the Patagonian coast between Cape
Possession and Dungeness Spit, recounts his falling
340 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

in with seven or eight Condors, one of which he
tried in vain to stalk.

“Tt is,” he says, “a truly magnificent bird when
seen wild and on the wing; and one cannot be
surprised that the most exaggerated accounts were
given by the older travellers of the dimensions to
which it attains, as much as 18 feet having been
sometimes assigned to the expanse of wing.”

This, of course, is mere guesswork, and not an
ascertained measurement. Some idea of the size
of the. bird may be gained from an inspection of its
furcula, of which he gives a figure (p. 303) from a
specimen picked up on the beach.

If weight alone were a criterion of size, the
Steamer Duck of the Falkland Islands (AZzcropterus
cinereus — Anas brachyptera of Latham) would
challenge comparison with some of the birds
above named. The largest obtained by Dr
Cunningham, who gives an excellent account of it
(op. czt., p. 93), measured 3 feet 4 in. from bill to tail
and weighed 13 lb., while Captain Cook mentionsin
his Voyage that the weight ofone was 1glb. Captain
Philip King, who observed this “gigantic oceanic
duck” at the Falklands, described it as the largest
he had ever seen (Voyage of the Adventure, i. p.
36), and remarked upon the small size of the wings,
which, ‘‘not having sufficient power to raise the
body, serve only to propel it along rather than
through the water, and are used like the paddles of
a steam vessel. Aided by these and its strong,
broad-webbed feet, it moves with astonishing
rapidity. It would not be an exaggeration to state
THE LARGEST BIRDS THAT FLY 341

7;

its speed at from twelve to fifteen miles an hour.’
This bird, however, being incapable of flight, at
all events when fully adult (see Newton’s Dzc¢zon-
ary of Birds, p. 518), is not comparable with those
large pinioned species above mentioned.

As for the Wild Swan, which might seem to
challenge comparison with them, it may be

[eBeeceenicts S ss cia ues

THE WILD SWAN OR WHOOPER.

remarked ex passant that an adult Whooper
(Cygnus ferus) will measure 4 feet. 10 in. from tip of
billto end of tail (the long neck counting for much),.
7 feet in expanse of wing, and will weigh from 18 lb.
to25lb. Here it will be seen that, notwithstanding
the enormous weight, the extent of wing is no.
greater than in the Golden Eagle, much less than
in the Griffon Vulture, Cinereous Vulture, and
Lammergeier, and only half that of the Condor.
342 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

For our present purpose it remains only to
ascertain what has been recorded on good authority
of the measurements and weight of the largest
species of Albatross (Diomedia exulans). It is
found throughout the Southern Ocean, and is
seldom met with further north than lat. 30° S.,
although stragglers have from time to time been
reported as occurring beyond that limit. The
literature relating to this bird is very extensive, so
much so, indeed, that it will be necessary to pass
over many facts of interest concerning it, in order
to confine attention to the only two points which
have any bearing on the present inquiry, namely,
dimensions and weight.

Here is a good observation of the kind needed
by the late Dr George Bennett, of Sydney. In
his Gatherings of a Naturalist in Australasia
(1860, p. 72), he writes :—

‘On lunes, im lat, 27°19" Ss, lone, 16" 27. Ey
we captured the unusual number of seven speci-
mens of the great Wandering Albatross. They
were elegant birds of large size, with fine and
shining plumage, but were quite helpless and stupid
when brought on board. The size of the largest
was as follows: Length from the base of the bill
to the extremity of the tail, 3 feet. 10 in.; size of
the expanded wings, 11 feet 8 in. In others the
extended pinions measured from 10 feet 4 in. to
11 feet; indeed, I consider 11 feet the general
measurement. I have met with only one specimen
in which the spread of wings measured 14 feet.
The difference of sexes did not, in any of these
THE LARGEST BIRDS THAT FLY = 343

specimens, make any alteration in size; and
although the plumage differed through age, it did
not afford any sexual distinction.”

The late Mr W. Ayshford Sanford, writing of
Albatrosses seen during a voyage to Australia, and
particularly referring to those skinned and dissected
by himself (Zoologzs¢, 1889, p. 387), remarks :—

‘‘] have never measured an Albatross which

 

gh
THE WANDERING ALBATROSS.

was more than 11 feet in expanse of wing—I think
the exact measurement was 10 feet 10 in.—but |
have been confidently assured by others that they
have measured some as much as 14 feet.

This confirms the above-mentioned statement
by Dr Bennett.

Herr Reischek, who visited and described a
remarkable breeding haunt of the Wandering
Albatross in the Auckland Islands (Zvans. N.Z.
344 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Lnst., 1889, p. 126, and Zoologist, 1889, p. 337),
gives the following dimensions of some that he
measured: Total length from tip of bill to end of
tail, 3 feet 3 in.; bill 7 in.; tail, 7} in.; whole wing,
from 4 feet 10 in. to 5 feet 10 in. ; primaries, 1 foot
8 in. ; wholeleg, 1 foot 10 in. ; tarsus, 4% in. ; middle
toe, 7 in. By the expression ‘whole wing” is
evidently intended the length from the body (not
from the carpal joint) to the end of the longest
primary, just as the expression ‘whole leg”
includes more than the tarsus.

Out of more than a hundred specimens of the
large Albatross (D. exudans) caught and measured
by Mr J. F. Green (see his Ocean Birds, p. 5),
the largest was 11 feet. 4 in. from tip to tip. This,
he says, was confirmed by the experience of a ship’s
captain, who in forty years had never found one
over that length. As this bears out the observa-
tions of Dr Bennett and Mr Sanford, we may take
it that 11 feet represents the normal expanse of wing
in a fully adult bird of this species.

Captain F. W. Hutton, who has paid much
attention to the problem of flight, has contributed
to The /ozs for January 1903 an instructive paper
on the flight of Albatrosses, with figures reproduced
from photographs of these huge birds on the wing.
He endorses the statement made by Gould that
the average weight of the Wandering Albatross
is 17 lb.

The following table will render possible a ready
comparison of the species named :—
THE LARGEST BIRDS THAT FLY 345

(goyny) “ql 41
poleys JON
(pInoy) ‘q] Zt
‘QI Sz 01 “q] gt
‘at $4 01 “qi §

*q[ OF 03 ‘q|
faustaneres a0 fr aoe
(94gt “100Z) "20 g ‘q] OF
(prehe'T) ‘q] SE 0} -q] of
(uvurdeyD) ‘q[ of 03 “q] gz
(wos[oysIN) “ql 9@
(aosusaa}s) ‘q] bz
peleis JON
paleis JON
peleis JON
paieis JON
pelvis JON

(uewdey)) ‘q] 91
“q[ VI 0} ‘q] O1
“QL SI 03 “q] PI
“QI Oz 04 -q] gt

(pinoy) “qi 6
‘ql fOr 03 “qI $8
‘dl 8 99 “G19
‘QI 91 01 “q] OF
*q] ZI 01 ‘q] 6

(u0yNFY) YZ OUI YL

(piojyues) ‘ul Or "YO:

(Weuueg) "y VE 0. “Y IT

(Aqqas) “yg ory Z
° yg ors
y601'7.8

‘ulg YO

(T23PLL) “UL 9 “YO
(ayeu) “6 01 YQ
. . ‘ul I y Z

é ‘ure sy Z
‘ul g 9

(wed) @ WSOSILT, 45 AE SE

*(wedkg) , 2u0,, “EI
(wetgq) ,AuvUr,, “yy ZI
(radurky MM) ‘Ul 9 “IY Or
* (urmieq) ‘urg "yg
(qdjopny

auld) ‘6 0} ‘ulg ‘yg

‘Ul zy 6 oy UE “Bg
* ‘UL OI 376 01 17.8
‘ul ZY 6 0} ‘UL OI “I¥8
*  (pmmory) ur gy 9
‘UL OI ‘I¥.9 OF ‘UIE “49
a 1-y Zour yo

5 Ysgorys
‘ul gy 407 U9 "IE 9

‘ULOI ‘YE &
‘Urol ‘Ye
‘Ul OI ‘yy
(Aqras) “y §
. . y (Ss
"Urg YE oy -urg ye
: (ee A) “YP
* (PAPEL) “arg YE
“Ul g "yy Y
pies JON

pajeis JON

ur 6y€

pies JON

peieis JON

paieis ION

“uUlg ‘ye

* (adivys) ‘ur g ‘yy €

‘ULI ‘YP oyturg yf
‘ULI "YEP 0} ‘UI g "YE
‘ul6 "YE oy ug ye
a yr UlOLYe

. “Yy ¢
" "YE op urg yc
‘ULQ "YZ OF UIQ YZ
ULOI “YZO} UL "YZ
* curb -y € 0, YE

_ (supynxa ‘) ssoryeqry
-  (suvjnxa a ssorjeqiy
(suvjnxa ‘() ssoiyequy

“  weMs PIEM

*  uoTa

x 4I0IS

(puesuq) auriz

(elpuy) oueig

* (eoLapy *S) (240. “H) preisng
*  {affiAeg) paeysng
(911149) preisng
(AIOJION) prvisng

* (ytyg) zopuoD

(IIYQ) zopuoD

(HIYD) ropuoD

(Aopenoq) 10puoy

* (eluoSeyeg) 1opuod

I919S1OUIWL'T

J9I1aS1IWWIe'T

ainyNA snosiaulg

‘aIny[NA UOyLID

(eyensny) a[seq poie}-ospo,
(uieds) o[seq peuedwy]

(etpuy) a[sey [emeduy

? ‘a[3eq vas

a[seq usapfoy

 

“"IYSIO

 

“Sur Jo asuvdxy

 

“"yysuayT

 

‘sotoadg jo omen
346 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

From this table it will be seen that, while the
heaviest bird capable of flight is the South African
Bustard, its expanse of wing is 3 feet less than that
of the famous Albatross, and 6 feet less than that of
the largest Condor on record.

It is somewhat curious that the Australian
Bustard, though said to be larger than our bird,

   

SSS
THE BUSTARD.

standing higher on its legs, and with longer neck,
weighs considerably less. Gould, who ‘‘ frequently
encountered and killed it both on the plains of the
Lower Namoi and also in South Australia,” gives
the weight of the male bird as from 13 lb. to 16 lb.
The Great Bustard of South Africa (Zupodotis
cristata), the Kori Bustard of Burchell’s Travels,
and the ‘‘gom paauw” of the colonists, according
 

 

THE LARGEST BIRDS THAT FLY 347

to Layard (Birds of South Africa), weighs from
30 Ib. to 35 |b.

Mr Carl Schneritz informed me in 1899 that he
shot two of these large African Bustards on the
high veld between Scheenspruit and Rustenberg
in the Transvaal, and that the larger of the two, a
male, measured 4 feet 6 in. in length, 9 feet in expanse
of wing, and weighed 37 lb. The hen bird, which
was smaller, weighed 30 lb. These weights were
carefully ascertained by the late General Smith
with his own scales on his farm at Oliphant’s Nek.

From a comparison of the measurements given
in the foregoing table it will be seen that there is
not much difference in the dimensions of the larger
eagles above mentioned, all of which are less than
those of the largest vultures. The far-famed
Lammergeier does not exceed in size the Griffon
Vulture, nor does it weigh so much by several
pounds; while in point of size the Giant Albatross
of the Southern Ocean, with an average expanse of
11 feet 4 in. has to yield to the Condor of Chili,
whose extended pinions have in many cases
measured 12 feet, and in one instance, on good
authority, the almost incredible width of 15 feet.
SMALL BIRDS ON MIGRATION CARRIED
BY LARGER ONES

Tue late Dr John Rae, the well-known Arctic
traveller, ata meeting of the Linnean Society read
a paper relating to the birds and mammals of
Hudson Bay Territories, and in the course of his
remarks referred to the assertion of the Cree
Indians, both at Moose and York Factory, that a
small passerine bird, which was pointed out to him,
but the name of which he had forgotten, habitually
avails itself of the passage of the Canada Goose
when migrating to get a lift in the same direction,
they having frequently seen it fly off from a goose
when shot, or shot at, on the wing. All the coast
Indians of Hudson’s Bay, says Dr Ray, devote a
month or more every spring to wildfowl shooting
(chiefly geese), the birds killed forming their entire
food for the time. As soon as the geese begin to
arrive, the Indian constructs a concealment of
willows and grass, usually near a pool of open water,
at the edge of which he sets up decoys. When
geese are seen approaching, usually flying at a
great height, the Indian imitates their call, and the
geese, on seeing the decoys, circle round, gradually
coming lower down until within shot, when they are
fired at. It is from these high-flying geese that the
348
SMALL BIRDS ON MIGRATION | 349

small birds are seen to come. If the geese are
flying low it is a pretty sure indication that they
have already rested on the ground, somewhere near,
after their long flight, when of course their tiny
passengers would have alighted. The Indians on
the shores of Athabasca and Great Slave Lakes—
both great resorts of wild geese—and those living
onthe Mackenzie River, more than athousand miles
to the north-west of Moose Factory, tell the same
story, and from the positive statements which were
made to him on the subject Dr Rae saw no reason
to doubt theassertion. So far as he could ascertain,
the Canada Goose is the only species in North
America which thus acts the part of a locomotive,
and conveys small passengers from place to place;
but in Europe and Africa the Common Crane and
the Stork have on very respectable authority
been credited with performing a similar friendly
office.

Dr Lennep in his Lzble Customs in Bible
Lands refers to the many small birds which find
their way from Palestine into Arabia and Egypt on
the backs of Cranes, over lofty mountains and sea,
which without such aid it would be difficult to cross.
In the autumn flocks of Cranes are seen coming
from the north with the first cold blast from that
quarter, flying low, and uttering peculiar cries as
they circle over the cultivated plains. Little birds
of different species may then be seen flying up to
them, while the twittering of those already comfort-
ably settled upon their backs may be distinctly
heard. On their return in spring they fly high,
350 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

perhaps considering that their little passengers can
easily find their way down to the earth.

In some instances, however, the small birds have
been seen to come off the backs of the larger ones
just as the latter were about to alight. An
American visitor to the Island of Crete in the
autumn of 1878, as related by Professor Claypole, of
Antioch College, Yellow Springs, Ohio,’ satisfied
himself that Wagtails and other small birds cross
over from Europe on their southward migration on
the backs of Cranes; and although, on first hearing
the statement made, he was extremely incredu-
lous, he afterwards, on one occasion, had ocular
demonstration of the fact. A fisherman in his
presence discharging his flint-lock at a flock of
passing Cranes, he saw three small birds rise up
from among them and disappear.

A German author, Adolf Ebeling, writing in
the Gartenlaube, asserts that he found it currently
believed at Cairo that Wagtails and other small
birds cross from Europe to Nubia and Abyssinia on
the backs of Storks and Cranes, and details the
result of conversations which he had with several
independent witnesses, all testifying to the same
thing. He then proceeds: “At supper, in the
Hotel du Nil, I related the curious story to all
present, but, naturally enough, found only
unbelieving ears. The only one who did not laugh
was the Privy Councillor von Heuglin, the famous
African traveller, and, excepting Brehm, the most
celebrated authority of our time on the birds of

1 Nature, February 24, 1881.
SMALL BIRDS ON MIGRATION 351

Africa.” On asking his opinion, he remarked,
‘‘ Let others laugh, they know nothing about it. I
do not laugh, for the thing is well known to me. |
should have made mention of it in my work if I
had had any personal proof tojustifyit. I consider
the case probable, though I cannot give any
warrant forit.” ‘‘ My discovery, if I may so call it,”
continues Herr Ebeling, “I would have kept to
myself, even after Heuglin had thus expressed
himself, had I not since discovered a new authority
for it. In the second edition of Dr Petermann’s
great book of travels I find the following: Professor
Roth, of Munich, related to me, in Jerusalem, that
the weil-known Swedish traveller, Hedenborg,
made an interesting observation on the island of
Rhodes, where he was staying. In the autumn,
when the Storks came in flocks over the sea to
Rhodes, he often heard the notes of small birds,
without being able to see them; but on one occa-
sion he observed a party of Storks just as they
alighted, and saw several small birds come off their
backs, having been thus evidently transported by
them across the sea.

In the face then of such testimony as that
above mentioned, and the admission of his belief
in the story by so experienced an ornithologist as
Heuglin, the conclusion seems inevitable that there
must be some truth in it, and it has received some
confirmation from a singular observation since made
in England. Mr T. H. Nelson, of Redcar, writing
in the Zoologist for February, 1882 (p. 73), reports
an occurrence related to him by an eye-witness, Mr
352 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Wilson, the foreman on the South Gare Break-
water, at the mouth of the Tees, which bears
directly on the question at issue.

On the morning of October 16, fine and cold,
wind northerly, Wilson was at the end of the Gare,
when he saw a “ Woodcock Owl” (Short-eared Owl)
‘come flopping across the sea.” As it came
nearer he saw something between its shoulders,
and wondered what it could be. The Owl came
and lit on the gearing within ten yards of where
he was standing, and directly it came down a little
bird dropped off its back and flew along the Gare.
He signalled for a gun, but the Owl saw him
move, and flew off. He followed the small bird,
however, and secured it, and on taking it to the
local bird-stuffer for preservation learnt that it
was a Golden-crested Wren.

To see its irregular, and apparently weak, flight
in passing through the air ona stormy day, it would
never be supposed that so tiny a creature as the
Golden-crested Wren would attempt to cross the
sea, or would succeed in doing so if it tried. But
that it travels to and from the Continent in spring
and autumn is a fact which has been well ascertained
by many competent observers. On the coasts of
Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, says Mr Cordeaux, the
autumnal migration of the Gold-crest is as well
known as that of the Woodcock, and from its
usually arriving just before that species, itis known
as the ‘“‘ Woodcock Pilot.” The North Sea fisher-
men assert that these little birds often alight on
their boats, and in foggy weather perish by hundreds,
SMALL BIRDS ON MIGRATION § 353

The same thing has been observed by Mr E. T.
Booth off the coast of Norfolk. So recently as
October 1905, two cases were reported of Gold-
crests coming on board ship at some distance from
land. In the one case several of these little birds
alighted on board H.M.S. Russell, while going
from Broadford Bay to Berehaven on October 11 ;
and on the same day a similar occurrence was noted
on H.M.S. Good Hope, while steaming along the
coast of Ireland, some 12 or 15 miles from land,
between Wicklow Head and Hook Point.

There is, then, nothing so improbable as might
at first sight appear in a Gold-crest crossing the
North Sea and alighting tired on the broad platform
afforded by the expansive back and wings of a Short-
eared Owl travelling at slower speed beneath it. At
anyrate, the fact remains that the Gold-crest was
seen to descend from the Owl’s back when the
latter alighted, and its identity was placed beyond
doubt by its subsequent capture. There is verily
in heaven and earth much that is still undreamt of
in our philosophy.
MARCH CUCKOOQS

Tue migration of birds has now been so long
and so patiently studied by good observers in
different parts of the country that we may indicate
with confidence the average date of arrival of all
our summer visitors, and even say where they spend
the months in which they are absent from England.
Especially is this the case with some of the better-
known species, because more frequently observed,
such as the Swallow and Sand Martin, the Chiff-
chaff, Wheatear, Nightingale, and Cuckoo. These
birds are more or less familiar to the majority of
country folks, and many persons make a practice of
looking for their earliest and latest appearance and
reporting the dates for publication. Unfortunately,
there are people who do not distinguish, let us say,
a Swallow from a House Martin, or a Cuckoo from
a Sparrow Hawk, but who nevertheless do not
hesitate to chronicle their mistakes as if they were
facts, too often appending only their initials, or some
nom de plume, which makes it impossible for any
serious recorder to utilise their observations.
Obviously the most trustworthy records are those
which have been kept by some observant naturalist
in one locality uninterruptedly for many years, and
fortunately for our guidance several such series of
354
MARCH CUCKOOS 355

accurate data have been preserved and published.
Several well-known naturalists have kept records of
this kind for twenty, thirty, and forty years, and in
one instance, where members of a Norfolk family
continued the observations commenced by a pre-
decessor, a journal was carefully kept for more than

 

THE CUCKOO.

acentury. It is to records such as these that one
naturally turns for accurate information as to the
arrival of migratory birds, especially when there is
reason to doubt the truth of a report which announces
the appearance of some particular species many
weeks before the usual date of its arrival.

To take the case of the Cuckoo. Scarcely a
year elapses in which we do not read in the daily
356 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

papers the announcement that a Cuckoo has been
seen or heard in March, and in 1904 correspondents
were bold enough to affirm that they had seen the
bird in February. There is, of course, no inherent
impossibility in the arrival of this bird a week or
ten days earlier or later than its usual time. But
when we are asked to believe that it was seen
nearly two months before the average date of its
appearance in this country a demand is made upon
our credulity which it is very difficult to concede.
From numerous observations made by competent
naturalists in different parts of the country it appears
that the average date for the appearance of the
Cuckoo throughout the whole of England and
Scotland is April 23 (St George’s Day); for the
south of England, April 15; and that the earliest
date reported by a trustworthy observer is April 6.
In the north of Scotland the arrival of the Cuckoo
is looked for during the first days of May, fully a
fortnight later than in the south of England, and in
Ireland, according to Messrs Usher and Warren
(Birds of [reland, p. 113), ‘‘the ordinary time of its
arrival is from April 16 to 30, through it has been
frequently noticed in the first half of that month
from the 2nd onwards.” Nota word is said by any
of the observers quoted except the last named
concerning even the occasional appearance of a
Cuckoo in March. Some years ago, on receiving a
report of a Cuckoo seen in Shropshire on March
6, I invited the opinions of certain well-known
naturalists who had been observing the habits of
birds all their lives, with a view to ascertain whether
MARCH CUCKOOS 397

they had ever known a single confirmatory instance
of such a report, and the replies received all ex-
pressed the incredulity of the writers.

The late Lord Lilford wrote :—

“T have not as yet (May 1894) ever seen a
Cuckoo that was even supposed to have been
obtained in this country before April. Till I have
seen a specimen positively sworn to by a competent
person as so obtained I shall remain as at present
entirely incredulous.”

Mr John Cordeaux, writing from North Lincoln-
shire on the 15th April 1899, stated that, on looking
through his notes of the previous forty years, he
found the Cuckoo seldom recorded before the fourth
week in April, that is after the 21st. The earliest
he had noted was heard on April 8.

The late William Borrer, author of Zhe Birds of
Sussex, wrote :—

‘Having kept notes of the arrival of the Cuckoo
in this country for more than thirty years, I find the
earliest to have occurred on April 6, 1844, but
about the 14th is the more usual date.”

Mr James Carter, of Masham, Yorkshire, an
old correspondent, wrote :—

“T find that the earliest record of the arrival of
the Cuckoo during the last twenty years was on
April 17, and it is usually about the third week in
April before it is seen here in Yorkshire.”

Writing from Bloxham, Banbury, Mr O. V.
Aplin, author of Zhe Birds of Oxfordshire, re-
marked :—

“The Cuckoo seldom reaches North Oxon
358 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

before the last week in April. In twelve years
(1878-1890) the average date of my own observa-
tion of it has been the 27th or 28th. The earliest
date the 20th in 1883.”

Mr Thomas Southwell, of Norwich, after forty
years’ experience, wrote :—

‘Such a bird as a ‘March Cuckoo’ has no place
in my experience. It has struck me that where any
attempt has been made to describe these early
birds, the few and very vague particulars given
have always appeared to indicate the plumage of
the young bird, an obvious absurdity, but very
suggestive of the Kestrel. I have now before me
a table of /udications of Spring, extending over a
very long period, and kept by a succession of
naturalists of the same family and in the same
parish in Norfolk. The date of the Cuckoo's
first note is there recorded for 106 years, the
earliest being on April 9, 1752, and the latest
on May 7, 1767, and the mean of 106 years
April 23.”

In addition to the foregoing records, the follow-
ing reports of early Cuckoos appear equally worthy
of credence. The Rev. W. A. Faulkener, of
Churchill Rectory, Worcester, wrote: ‘‘ The Cuckoo
arrived to-day (April 4, 1894). I have booked its
coming to this spot for the last thirty years, and
this is the earliest date I have on record during
that period. From the 15th to the 21st are the
most usual dates.” The same year Mr J. G.
Whitehead, of Woodfalls, Yalding, Kent, reported :
‘““T saw and heard the first Cuckoo on April 4. It
MARCH CUCKOOS 359

was very noisy, uttering its welcome note all the
afternoon, and in one instance flew close by me.”
A third observer, Mr C. Gillanders, of Berkeley
Road, Gloucester, wrote: “On Saturday, March
31, I saw a Cuckoo here, and on Monday, April
2, both saw and heard one.” Thus there appears
to be good evidence that the Cuckoo has been
both seen and heard in the south of England at
least a fortnight before the average date of its
arrival, April 15, as fixed by careful observations
extending over many years. But of late there
has been a noticeable tendency on the part of
a few individuals to ‘beat the record” by advanc-
ing the date of arrival to the middle and even
the beginning of March, until the spring of 1904,
when, as above stated, we were asked to believe
that a Cuckoo was seen in Hampshire on February
27. It can hardly be doubted that the observers
referred to were deceived by appearances. It is
surprising how few people are to be trusted, either
in the matter of eyes or ears, in regard to the
Cuckoo. Many do not know a Cuckoo on the
wing from a male Sparrow Hawk, which it resembles
in size, colour, length of tail, and flight; others
convince themselves that they have heard this
bird’s notes when they have been listening to a
clever imitation by some village bird-nesting boy,
or to the still more deceptive notes of a cuckoo
clock in a neighbouring cottage. Before one can
admit that Cuckoos are to be found in England
during the early days of March and the last week
of February, it will be necessary to produce better
360 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

evidence of the fact (if it be one) than has yet
been supplied. Professor Newton, in a footnote
to the article “Cuckoo” in the fourth edition of
Yarrell’s British Birds (vol. ii., p. 389), remarks:
‘Its arrival has frequently been reported in March
or earlier still, but such records must be treated
with suspicion if not incredulity.”

Since this chapter was written, Mr J. G. Millais,
writing from Horsham on April 8, 1905, re-
marked :—‘‘I have always been sceptical about
‘March Cuckoos,’ but have just been converted.
On April 1 I heard a Cuckoo calling for some time
in an oak tree in front of Warnham Court, Hors-
ham, and both heard and saw another (or possibly
the same) on April 2. Now this bird the Warnham
gardeners assured me had been calling all day on
March 31, and I see no reason to doubt their state-
ment. They all heard it, and remarked upon the
unusually early arrival of the bird.”

Mr James Andrews of Beaminster, Dorset, re-
ported the same week that the keeper on the Map-
perton estate in that neighbourhood informed him
that he heard the Cuckoo on April 1, and two other
men informed him that they had heard it there on
the previous day.
CUCKOO SPIT

Durinc the spring and early summer few persons,
and especially those who own gardens, can have
failed to notice on various plants a white frothy
substance commonly known as ‘cuckoo spit,” and
many doubtless have speculated on its precise
nature and origin without arriving at any very
definite or accurate conclusion. That it is the
work of an insect, Aphrophora spumaria or bifascrata
is soon made clear by the detection of a small larva
in the midst of the frothy mass, but ‘‘ what insect,”
and ‘‘in what way is the substance produced,” are
questions which with many persons perhaps remain
unsolved.

It is curious that it should be so, seeing that the
true nature of the secretion was made known two
centuries ago (1705) bya French naturalist (Poupart)
in the AZémozres of the Academy of Paris; but the
general ignorance on the subject seems to be due to
the want of definite information, or at least to the
very vague statements on the subject afforded by the
ordinary text-books. Many authors content them-
selves with stating that the so-called ‘‘cuckoo spit”
is the work of a small homopterous insect known as
Aphrophora spumaria, but they omit to state

whether it is caused by the perfect insect or by its
301
362 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

larva, and whether the substance is exuded by the
plant on being punctured by the insect’s proboscis,
or is in the nature of an excrementitious deposit on
the surface of the leaf. We have heard both these
views expressed, but on inquiry it appeared that
our informants were merely stating what they
supposed to be the case, and not what they had
ascertained by actual observation. Reference to
half a dozen text-books has failed to show which of
these explanations is the right one, but, fortunately,
we are not without an authoritative statement on
the subject. The late Professor Westwood, in his
Introduction to the Modern Classification of
Insects, writing of the order Homoptera, the
members of which he describes as having a
convex body, with short antenne and four wings,
entirely membranous and deflexed, the mouth
arising from the under and hinder surface of the
head, the mandibles and maxillz enclosed in the
labium, proceeds to deal with the family Cercopzda,
the species of which are constantly found amongst
plants, upon the juices of which they subsist by
introducing their rostrum into the stems or leaves.
They belong to the same order as the Aphide, but
to that section which has the whole of the upper
wings leathery.

‘One of the best known insects in this family,”
he says, ‘‘is the Aphrophora spumaria, a species of
small size, which frequents garden plants, the larva
and pupa investing themselves with a frothy ex-
crementitious secretion which has given rise to
various fancies. Cuculorum nascuntur spunio was
CUCKOO SPIT 363

the notion entertained by the ancients; whilst the
modern names ‘froghopper’ and crachat de
grenourlles indicate their supposed origin from
another tribe of animals.”

Many years later, in a notice of a tube-making
homopterous insect from Ceylon, presently to be
mentioned (Zvans. Entomol. Soc. Lond.,1886, p. 329),
the same distinguished entomologist thus referred
to the ‘‘ cuckoo spit ” :—

“Tt is no other than the fluid excrement of the
larva of the insect, consisting of the juices of the
plant on which it subsisted, and which, being dis-
charged with very little alteration in its nature, drop
by drop from the insect, forms an accumulated
moistened mass, which keeps the body of the insect
in a moist condition until it is ready to assume the
perfect state.”

The precise manner in which the froth is
formed is thus described by an American observer,
Professor Morse :—

“The larva pierces the plant with the mouth
parts and commences to suck the juice. While
this action is going on a clear watery fluid escapes
from certain pores in the body, and in a short time
the insect is completely immersed in it. As it is
obliged to breathe air, it secures this by turning up
the hinder part of the body, and by means of little
appendages clasps a bubble of air, which then flows
along the under side of the abdomen. Here it is
taken in through the spiracles, and, having been so
used, is allowed to escape in the fluid in which the
insect is immersed. This operation is repeated
364 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

over and over again until the fluid becomes filled
with these little bubbles, and assumes the appear-
ance of froth.”

The larve are plentiful in spring, while the per-
fect insects abound most in autumn.

According to Professor Westwood a species of
Aphrophora is found abundantly on trees in
Madagascar, the larva of which has the power of
emitting a considerable quantity of clear water,
especially in the middle of the day, when the heat
is greatest. A still more curious case is that of the
tube-making homopteron, allied to Aphrophora
already referred to, as found in Ceylon. The full-
sized larva tubes are about half an inch long and
about one line in diameter, of the thickness of
writing paper, of a dirty white colour, with the
surface finely transversely wrinkled, the basal
portion being dilated and curved so as partially to
clasp the twig on which it is fixed. The larva
resides in the tube, and discharges at intervals a
clear watery fluid, which escapes from the tube drop
by drop.

The phenomena known as “ weeping trees” are
due to insects of this family, the Cercopide ; some
of the species, says Dr Sharp, make such copious
exudations of this kind that the drops have been
compared to a shower of rain (Cambridge Natural
Fiistory, ‘‘ Insects,” p. 577).

As an illustration of the inconvenience which
arises from changing well-known names, it may
here be remarked that Dr Sharp calls the English
insect Philenus spumarius, but although he devotes
CUCKOO SPIT 365

nearly a page to a consideration of the family to
which it belongs, and notices the larve, which have
the power of “emitting the liquid in the form of
bubbles, which accumulate round the insect and
conceal it” (p. 577), the words <Aphrophora
Spumaria and ‘‘ cuckoo spit” are not to be found in
his index. Consequently the reader, who might not
happen to know that the in-  __ Pe
sect belongs to the order ‘SX .
Homoptera, might suppose ;
that there is no mention of it
it in the volume. Cross re- e
ferences to these names in
the index would certainly
have been useful. But we cue cvcxoo srir anp Inszct
find it under the heading (APHROPHORA BIFASOIATA).
‘‘Froghopper,” another name for it, bestowed on the
larval form on account of its wonderful powers of
leaping.

The perfect insect is about a quarter of an inch
in length. It is commonly to be found on pinks
and carnations, remaining stationary on a plant for
several weeks, and is especially abundant on
willows. A smaller species (4. d2fasczata) is found
usually on rose bushes and other garden plants.
When the larve are deprived of the shelter afforded
by the secretion they appear quite helpless, and if
the day be hot are almost immediately killed.
Hence an effectual mode of clearing plants of
‘‘cuckoo spit” is to brush it off during sunshine,
and the insects are at the same time destroyed,

It has been stated by some writers (e.g., by

 

 
366 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Mr Stainforth Green) that no damage is caused to
the plant by the presence of the larve, but Mr
George Nicholson in his //ustrated Dictionary of
Gardening states that ‘this pest attacks the young
shoots of plants, choosing the axil of a leaf for its
abode, and so damaging the shoot in some cases as
to cause it to die or become malformed.” The
following remedies, besides frequent syringing with
clear water, are recommended :—

Tobacco Liguid.—To a gallon of water add 1 oz.
of soft soap, and when thoroughly dissolved mix a
tablespoonful of Corry and Soper’s nicotine, well
syringing the plants. This is best applied luke-
warm, and then well washed off with clean water in
about an hour.

Quassia.—Steep ¢ lb. quassia chips in a gallon
of boiling water, and when cold add about the same
quantity of water. This should be applied with a
syringe and not washed off afterwards. It renders
the stems of the plants nauseous, but does not injure
them.

The ‘‘cuckoo spit” is considered by some naturalists
to be a protective device, but, according to Dr
Sharp, the larve are a favourite food with certain
Hymenoptera, which pick them out and carry them
off to store them as provision for their own larve.
They are devoured also by many of the smaller
insectivorous birds, and, as remarked by several
correspondents, are swallowed by young Pheasants.
The conclusion, however, at which one writer arrives
is probably erroneous. He states that several of
his young Pheasants have shown symptoms of a
CUCKOO SPIT 367

disease similar to gapes, which he is almost sure
comes from swallowing ‘‘ cuckoo spit” off the grass,
for he has often seen them pecking at it, and he
adds that if a young Pheasant thus affected be held
head downwards, a liquid exactly like ‘cuckoo spit”
will run out of its mouth.

Now, in the first place, the insect food which is
so much sought after by small passerine birds is
not likely to prove injurious to young gallinaceous
birds of any kind—which swallow the ‘cuckoo spit”
more for the moisture than for the very small larva
which it envelops ; and, in the next place, the frothy
exudation from the windpipe happens to be a
symptom of gapes. This complaint arises from the
presence in the trachea of a number of small red
worms, known as Syugamus trachealts, provoking a
spasmodic gasping in the effort to prevent suffoca-
tion, and a salivary exudation resulting from the
irritation of the mucous membrane, caused by the
attachment of the parasite. If the ‘“‘cuckoo” spit
were acid or astringent in its effects it would be
distasteful to such delicate little birds as the Willow
Wren, Whitethroats, and Garden Warbler, which
swallow it, and would affect them in the same way
as it is supposed to affect young Pheasants. It is
probably neutral and harmless in its effects.

What, then, it may be asked, is the connection
between the insect and the Cuckoo, and why should
the frothy investment of the larva be designated
‘cuckoo spit”? There is, in fact, no connection
between the two. The notion rests upon mere
fable, the country people asserting that the Cuckoo
368 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

when it arrives in spring ejects the frothy spittle on
the leaves, and that the larve found therein are
Cuckoos in embryo. This popular myth may be
traced in many parts of the Continent where our
‘cuckoo spit ” is the kLukuks-specichel of the Germans,
the Swiss guggerspeu, Danish gzogespyt, Norwegian
trold-kiaringspye, and French crachat de coucou.
The names “frog spit” and “ froghopper,” as above
hinted, have been suggested by the remarkable
jumping power of the active larva.

The folk-lore of the Cuckoo is almost inexhaus-
tible. Mr Hardy has compiled an interesting store
of information on this subject in his ‘“‘ Popular His-
tory of the Cuckoo,” published in the second part
of the Folk-lore Record. The reader may also
be referred to Mannhardt’s learned paper in the
Zeuschrift fiir Deutsche Mythologie, vol. iii., pp.
209-298.
SNAKES SHELTERING THEIR YOUNG

THE question “ whether snakes, in time of danger,
offer their young a temporary refuge in their throats,
whence they emerge when the danger is past,”
has long given rise to controversy which from time
to time we are accustomed to see revived. The
popular belief in this alleged habit is of considerable
antiquity, and a number of authors might be named
who have mentioned or made allusion to it. Not
to go beyond English writers, however, I may
refer to Spenser (Faertze Queene, 1590, canto i.,
14, 15, 22, 25) and Sir Thomas Browne, the well-
known physician of Charles II.’s time, who, in his
Enquiries into Vulgar and Common Errors, 1646,
remarks: ‘‘ The young ones will, upon any fright,
for protection, run into the belly of the dam; for
then the old one receives them in at her mouth,
which way, the fright being past, they will return
again; which is a peculiar way of refuge, and,
although it seems strange, is avowed by frequent
experience and undeniable testimony.”

Izaak Walton, also, in his Complete Angler,
mentions the common snake,’ which “does breed
her young alive, which she does not then forsake,
but bides with them; and in case of danger will
take them all into her mouth, and swim away from

2A 369
370 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

any apprehended danger, and then let them out
again when she thinks all danger to be past. These
be accidents,” he says, “that we anglers sometimes
see, and often talk of.”

In the case of the English Adder, many instances
have been reported in which the young were seen
to enter the parent’s mouth, and either to leave it
when unmolested, or to be found in the esophagus
when the parent was killed. One of the best cases
of this kind is recorded in The Zoologist for 1882
(p. 394), and is attested by three eye-witnesses,
who append their signatures. It is as follows :—

“When shooting on Mr Lenox’s moor, near
Newton Stewart, in Wigtownshire, one of us dis-
covered an Adder coiled up on a sunny bank on the
moor. Upon his calling to the others of us, we all
gathered round, and we then saw the Adder, which
by this time had been disturbed, with several young
adders roundher. We then distinctly saw her open
her mouth and allow the young to crawl down her
throat, after which she was killed by having her
head crushed with the heel of a shooting boot.
Having seen the young go down her throat, and
being still able to see the movements of them inside
her, one of us cut off her head, and some of the
young thereupon crawled out of that end of the
body. We then laid the body open through its
entire length, and found more young adders, which
were quite able to strike at the point of a stick when
irritated by it. We all distinctly remember the
above circumstances, and are quite certain that not
only did the young adders first crawl down their
SNAKES SHELTERING YOUNG . 371

mother’s throat, but also came out again from the
head end of the body after the head itself had been
cut off. We are quite certain that these were in
the gullet, and not 2% uéero. Until quite recently
we were not aware that it was otherwise than an
admitted fact that adders swallow their young ina
moment of apparent danger, or we should have
taken the necessary steps at the time for preserving
the bodies of the mother and her young.

“ Signed) Grorce A. St Crorx Rose.
“ B. LANCASTER ROSE.
“Gro. Lennox Lenox.
““ RAYNERS, PENN, Bucks, Sepéember 1882.”

On December 17, 1878, Mr J. H. Gurney, Sen.,
wrote :—

“An old shepherd at Cossey, named Galley, once
found a large Viper lying with her young ones near
her, one of which ran down her throat on hisapproach,
followed by a second, which, however, could only
get partly down and then backed out again.
Thereupon he killed the Viper, and found in the
anterior portion of the gullet the young one he had
first seen creep down, and just below it a newly
swallowed mouse, which blocked the passage, so
that there was only room for one young one to
take refuge between the mouse and the viper’s
mouth.” ?

In August 1886 the late Mr J. C. Mansel
Pleydell of Whatcombe, near Blandford, wrote :—

‘The attention of a woodman in my employ

1 Trans. Norfolk Nat. Soc., ii. p. 614.
372. RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

was attracted by a hissing noise at his feet. On
looking down he saw a large Viper lying distended
in a cart rut, in the act of receiving five young
vipers into its mouth, which he distinctly saw the
reptile open wide before the first of the five crawled
in. It was immediately despatched, and on cutting
the body open, the woodman found the young ones
alive, and wriggling some distance down, and still
further towards the posterior end, an undigested
shrew mouse.”

In November 1895 Mr Pleydell again wrote :—

‘‘T consider there can be no further testimony
needed to substantiate the long-contested question
whether the Adder swallows her young in time of
danger than that of Charles Joyce of Winterbourne,
Houghton, Dorset. An Adder was seen by Joyce
to lower her head, which had been for some time in
an erect position, and after resting the lower jaw on
the ground, she deliberately opened her mouth and
received her offspring, thirteen in number. With
thoughtful precaution, after killing her, he tied a
string round her throat and brought the reptile
home, and in the presence of my tenant he liberated
the thirteen young from the dead body of the old
one, as lively as when they entered her mouth some
hours previously—a proof that they had not entered
the actual stomach, otherwise digestion would surely
have commenced its disintegrating work.” This,
however, would not necessarily be the case, for it
has been ascertained by experiment that the gastric
fluid acts much more slowly upon living tissue than
upon dead prey; thus the temporary retention of
SNAKES SHELTERING YOUNG 373

young adders in the stomach of the parent would
not necessarily be fatal to them as supposed.’

In 1903, on June 16th, I was strolling through
Kentish woodlands at Orlestone, near Ashford, in

 

THE ADDER OR VIPER.

company with Mr R. J. Balston. His head keeper,
named Stickles, informed us that he had lately
disturbed an Adder with her young ones; that he
saw them enter the parent’s mouth; that he killed

1See Putnam, American Naturalist, vol. it., p. 133.
374 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the parent, and that on holding her up dy che tatl
and squeezing the body downwards towards the head
the young were pressed out of the mouth and fell
among the herbage. He had never heard of the
offer of a reward for an Adder killed after swallow-
ing her young and with mouth tied up to prevent
their escape. His story was confirmed by another
keeper who had also witnessed the incident.

Although observations of this kind, more or less
circumstantial, have been usually made in the case
of the Adder or Viper—I prefer the name adder for
its good old English origin (A.S. x@dre, seen in
nether and natterjack)—similar observations have
been reported of many other species of snake ; so
many, indeed, that it seems improbable that every
one of them could have been founded on error.

Indeed ever since Palisot de Beauvais discovered
that the Rattlesnake had the same habit as our
Adder a great deal of evidence has accumulated
which shows that the habit is common to several
American species.

A well-known American zoologist, Dr Brown
Goode, has been at the pains to publish all the
evidence he could collect on this subject. In the
Proceedings of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science, 1873 (comparable with
the Reports of our own British Association), he has
an article on the question ‘‘ Whether Snakes swallow
their young.”

In reply to his inquiry for evidence, printed in
the American Agriculturist for February 1873,
more than eighty letters were received from persons
SNAKES SHELTERING YOUNG | 375

in twenty-four different States and Provinces, and
altogether 120 letters came into his possession.
Sixty-seven witnesses saw the young snakes enter
the parent’s mouth, twenty-two of these heard the
young called by a hiss or sound of rattle, five
waited and saw the young reappear, one of them
seeing the act repeated several times; three saw
young ones issue from the old one’s mouth, and
thirty-six of those who saw the young enter the
mouth found them there on killing the parent.

Of these observations thirty-four relate to
Lutenia sirtalis and £. saurita (the Garter and
Ribbon Snakes), seventeen refer to the Water Snake
( Tropidonotus stpedon), nine to the Rattlesnake, two
to the Copperhead, three to the Moccasin, one to
the Massasanga (Crotalus tergeminus), one to the
Blowing Adder (/eterodon platyrhynchus), and three
to the Mountain Black Snake (Coluber alle-
ghaniensts).

The writer believes the case proved—and I
must say I am disposed to agree with him—proved,
that is to say, by the accumulated testimony of eye-
witnesses, and many a man has been hanged upon
no better evidence. It may be urged that this is
not strict scientific proof, nor would it be so if double
the number of observers had stated what they be-
lieved they had seen. It would, of course, have
been far more convincing if any one of them, after
seeing the young adders enter the parent’s mouth,
had slipped a noose over the head of the latter, and
imprisoned them until the parent was killed, and
the young liberated from the cesophagus in the
376 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

presence of some impartial referee. But this has
been done, as above mentioned, in this country, and
should convince those who are still sceptical on the
subject, and who are unable to see in such action a
remarkable provision of Nature for protecting the
young in time of danger.

Amongst the mammalia, the young in the
majority of cases are carried by the mouth, as dogs
carry their puppies and cats their kittens; or on
the back, as with apes and monkeys ; or clinging to
them in front, as in the case of bats; or in pouches,
as with all the marsupial animals. Amongst birds,
the young are transported by their parents with the
aid of the beak, as with the Wild Duck; or feet, as
in the case of the Woodcock and Snipe; or on the
back, as with the cliff-building guillemots and razor-
bills and the more familiar Swan; or even under
the wing, as happens with birds like grebes, which
escape by diving, and take their young with them.

In all these cases we see some special provision
for insuring the safety of the young in time of
danger. None of these methods is available for
young snakes. If they are to be protected at all by
their parents, they must be temporarily taken into
the mouth and cesophagus. And I see nothing im-
possible or absurd in such a process. Not only has
it been demonstrated (Zoo/ogzst, Sept. 1900) that on
anatomical grounds it is quite feasible, but there is
the analogous case of the Common Lizard (Zooteca
vivipara), which while kept in confinement has been
seen repeatedly to receive the young into its mouth
when danger threatened. It is not more strange
SNAKES SHELTERING YOUNG | 377

that this should happen than that the female
Cuckoo should carry her egg in her bill in order to
place it in the nest of a small bird which would be
otherwise inaccessible ; or that the young unfledged
Cuckoo should be able to hoist its foster brethren
out of the nest; yet both these facts have been
established by the testimony of unimpeachable
witnesses.

When Gilbert White wrote to Pennant, in
September 1770, on the subject of woodcocks
carrying their young—a fact which he was evidently
inclined to doubt, notwithstanding the assertion
made by Scopoli in a work then lately published—
he penned a sentence which I have long since
committed to memory. ‘Candour,” he = says,
“forbids me to say absolutely that any fact is false
because I have never been witness to such a fact.”
This, it seems to me, in the absence of strict
scientific proof, is a good mental attitude to assume
on the subject of this or any other discussion.
THE MOLE CRICKET

One of the most remarkable, yet least familiar, of
British insects is the Mole Cricket (Gryllotalpa
vulgaris). To professed entomologists no doubt it
is familiar enough, but to the majority of people,
even to those residing in the country, and professing
a taste for natural history, it is scarcely known
except by name, and from the figures of it which
have been from time to time published. The
reason for this no doubt is to be found in the
subterranean nature of its haunts; for it derives its
name from the analogy which it affords both in
structure and habits with the Mole. Belonging to
the large and widely-distributed order Orthoptera—
or straight-winged insects—which comprises the
cockroaches, stick and leaf insects, grasshoppers,
crickets, and locusts, the genus Gryllotalpa has
representatives in almost all parts of the world,
China, Java, Australia, New Guinea, North and
South America, and the West Indies, each species
being peculiar to the country in which it resides.
The so-called Mole Cricket of India, described
and figured by Lockwood’ belongs to quite another
genus (Schzzodactylus monstrosus), and is remarkable
for the great length of the wing cases, which extend
1 Natural History, Sport and Travel in Bengal, 1878, p. 209.
378
THE MOLE CRICKET 379

far beyond the extremity of the body, and the tips
of which when not in use are rolled up ina coil,
the basal part being horizontal except at the
edges.

It is of interest to note in the insects belonging
to the above-mentioned families the various modi-
fications of structure as correlated with habits.
Thus, while the wings are large and membranous,
strongly reticulated and folded longitudinally while
at rest, the legs are long and stout, raptorial in the
Mantide, cursorial in the cockroaches, ambulatorial
in the leaf-insects, saltatorial in the grasshoppers
and locusts, and fossorial in the mole crickets.
Some, like the cockroaches, are omnivorous;
others, like the Mantidg, carnivorous; but the
majority are herbivorous, and, as the less nutri-
tious the food the greater the supply needed, it
follows that some of the species, like the locusts,
being gregarious and of large size, are amongst the
most voracious and destructive of all insects.

The Mole Cricket in structure is admirably
formed for digging. Of a dark brown colour,
which harmonises with the soil and favours con-
cealment, the body is almost cylindrical, yet verti-
cally compressed; the forelegs short, but very
strong and broad, and, as in the case of the Mole,
directed obliquely outward. With the aid of these
curiously-shaped fore limbs it burrows like a Mole,
as Gilbert White observed, ‘raising a ridge as it
proceeds, but seldom throwing up hillocks,” though
its muscular strength is so great, that, according to
Roésel—incredible as it may appear—it is able to
380 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

exert a force equal to a counterpoise of 2 Ib. or
3 lb. It begins by sinking a vertical shaft, from
which, a little below the surface, it drives horizontal
galleries on either side. These galleries sometimes
extend a considerable distance, the little operator
working through all the roots that come in its way,
and as it prefers garden ground or other made soil,

 

THE MOLE CRICKET AT WORK.

it often does a great deal of damage. As it is
found chiefly in peaty soil mixed with sand or clay,
as well as in soil which has acquired some con-
sistency by the application of manure, its presence
may be regarded as somewhat local. Gilbert
White found it haunting moist meadows, the sides
of ponds and banks of streams, and performing all
its functions in a swampy, wet soil. The Welsh
THE MOLE CRICKET 381

antiquary Lhwyd, writing to John Ray from Oxford,
December 12, 1693, says :—

‘‘T observed near Kidwelly, in Caermarthen-
shire, this last summer, that the Grylotalpe live
there in the sea-lands that are covered every tide.
I brought one of them with me, and cannot find
that they differ from those of the Midland counties.
In Wales they are called Rhing y Lés, z.e., Strzdor
e@stivitatis. (Derham, Phzlosophical Letters, 1718,
Pp. 273.)

Early in the year it leaves its winter hiding-
place and commences to tunnel near the surface.
A nest is formed in a cup-shaped cavity about 14
in. in diameter, the surface of which is flattened by
pressure. In this the eggs, between 200 and 300,
and of a dull yellow colour, are laid in clusters.
The young crawl out in spring, and are at first
wingless. They are of adirty white colour at birth,
but gradually turn brown. Undergoing a succes-
sion of moults before they reach the adult stage,
they grow pretty fast, and begin to lead an
independent life after the second moult. A third
moult takes place in autumn (in October and
November), when, still in a wingless condition,
they hide, and do not moult again till the following
April or May, when the wing cases appear; while
after the fifth moult, in May or June, the Mole
Cricket becomes an adult insect able to fly, and
capable of reproducing its species. These details
of its life history are given by a Dutch naturalist,
Dr Ritzema Bos, in his treatise on Agricultural
Zoology, of which a translation by Professor
382 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Ainsworth Davis appeared in 1894. It seems
clear, however, from an examination of the works
of previous writers on this insect, that the Dutch
professor derived his information, not from personal
investigation of the subject, but from the observa-

 

THE MOLE CRICKET ON THE WING.

tions of Résel, Latreille, de Saussure, and other
continental authors, to some of whom Westwood
also was admittedly indebted when penning his
remarks on the Mole Cricket in his Zutroduction to
the Classification of Lusects.

No account of this species would be complete
without mention of the singular noise which it
THE MOLE CRICKET 383

produces, and which cannot be better described
than in the words of Gilbert White :—

“In fine weather about the middle of April,
and just at the close of day, they begin to solace
themselves with a low, dull, jarring note, continued
for a long time without interruption, and not
unlike the chattering of the Fern Owl or Goat-
sucker, but more inward.”

The sound of many together may be heard
from a considerable distance. It is somewhat
curious that the late Miss Ormerod in her Manual
of Ingurious Insects makes no mention of the Mole
Cricket, an omission due probably to the fact that
she never had an opportunity of personally study-
ing it; otherwise she would certainly have had
much to tell concerning it; for that it is an
‘injurious insect” there can be no doubt.

A French naturalist, M. Leféburier, published
a series of observations to show that it is upon
subterraneous insects, and not upon plants that
the Mole Cricket feeds, and Dr Kidd, who wrote
a long essay on the anatomy of this species,’ states
that he repeatedly found on dissection the
chitinous and indigestible parts of insects within
the stomach. Gould, the American entomologist,
fed a Mole Cricket for some months on ants.

Latreille remarked that it cuts or detaches the
roots of plants ‘‘not so much for the purpose of
feeding on them, as in order to force a passage
through them, for it feeds apparently on insects
or worms.” On the other hand, the observations

1 Phil. Mag. and Journ., 1825, pp. 401-428, with illustrations.
384. RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

of another French naturalist, Turpin, certainly
prove that the Mole Cricket is herbivorous.
Dr Kidd found that its digestive organs more
closely resemble those of a graminivorous bird
than of any other animal, an opinion shared by
Professor Owen, and, that of all kinds of vegetable
food, it prefers the potato. Gilbert White, too,
remarked: ‘If they take to the kitchen garden,
they occasion great damage among the plants and
roots by destroying whole beds of cabbages,
young legumes, and flowers.” Some years agoa
Mole Cricket found in South America and the
West Indies (Gryllotalpa adidactyla) was reported
to have committed great ravages upon the young
sugar canes, resulting in considerable loss to the
planters.

Dr Ritzema Bos says the Mole Cricket ‘‘gnaws
the roots of all kinds of plants, and often effects
great damage in this way.” It is harmful also on
account of its passages, which are formed close to
the surface. In this way it lifts young plants out
of the soil, while older plants are killed both by its
gnawing and digging. Such piants can often be
pulled up by grasping the leaves, and they will
always wither in the place where the nest is
found.

I have quite recently received confirmation of
some of these charges from a correspondent, who
inquires what is the remedy for these depredations,
or how they are to be prevented. I remember to
have read many years ago the recipe of a M. Barthe,
who recommended that a few drops of salad oil and
THE MOLE CRICKET 385

then water should be poured into the tunnel so as
not to overflow, and that the Mole Cricket would
then evacuate the nest and die. This, however,
assuming the plan to be efficacious, presupposes that
the operator will have both the patience and the
luck to find the openings to the nests, and for this
reason, if for no other, the process is likely to be a
slow one. The author of Agricultural Zoology,
above referred to, recommends the destruction of
the nests in June to begin with, and to be continued
later. ‘‘In those parts of a field” (he says) “ where
the plants are yellow or withered in a large circular
patch, a yard or so in diameter, the nest may be felt
for with the fingers and carefully lifted up so that
the eggs do not fall out.” Mole Crickets may also
be caught by means of flower-pots. The apertures
in the bottoms of these are stopped with corks, and
they are then sunk in the soil until the rims are on
a level with the passages ; they thus serve as pitfalls
from which the Mole Crickets are unable to escape.
Another plan is to place little heaps of horse-dung
on the ground in winter, when the Mole Cricket
will creep into them for the sake of warmth, and
may then be collected and killed. They appear to
be very sensitive to cold, and a severe and dry
winter will cause considerable mortality amongst
them. Much drought in summer and continuous
wet weather are also invariably unfavourable.

In addition to this, they have their natural
enemies, amongst which may be mentioned moles,
rooks, starlings, and the larger carnivorous beetles.

Those, therefore, who would wage warfare against
2B
386 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

rooks and starlings should not overlook the good
service which they render by ridding the land of
Mole Crickets, Wireworms, the larvee of Cockchafers
and Craneflies, as well as couch grass, the succulent
roots of which are constantly being torn up and
devoured by rooks, as proved by the fragments
found in the pellets which they eject of the
indigestible portions of their food.

The accompanying figure of the Mole Cricket at
rest is reproduced from a woodcut which illustrates
Gilbert White’s remarks on this insect in the edition
of his work by the Rev. Leonard Jenyns. The second
figure is from Cassell’s Natural History, edited
by the late Prof. Martin Duncan (vol. vi. p. 124),
where a brief account by the late W. S. Dallas of
the more important peculiarities of its structure
may be found.
THE SHAMROCK

THE seventeenth of March always brings to mind a
pretty custom and an ancient legend. Caleb
Threlkald, in his Synopsis Stirpium Hibernicarum
(1727), writing of the Shamrock, says: ‘ This
plant is worn by the people in their hats upon the
17th day of March yearly, which is called St
Patrick’s day,” and the custom, a very old one, is
still observed by Irish people throughout the land,
for the Shamrock is their national emblem as well
as the emblem of their faith. The oft-repeated
incident of its use by St Patrick to illustrate the
doctrine of the Trinity is perhaps the most popularly
known episode of his life, and yet it is purely
traditional, for evidence on the point there is none.
To St Patrick may well be applied the words of a
celebrated divine, who, preaching on a saint’s day,
exhorted his hearers to ‘consider first we know
little or nothing of this saint,” while many of the
statements which have been made concerning him
are chiefly conjectural, and some of them contra-
dictory. According to certain historians, he was
born at the end of the third century near Glaston-
bury in Somersetshire; by others he is asserted to
have been born in Scotland in a village at the
mouth of the Clyde, while a third legend makes
387
388 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

him a native of Tours and a nephew of St Martin.
About few other saints does so much uncertainty
prevail—even the year and day of his birth are
matters of dispute.

The festival of St Patrick, as every one knows, is
observed throughout Ireland on March 17, but
whether that is the date of his birth, or the day of
his death, no one apparently has been able to decide.
If Samuel Lover may be credited with any knowledge
of the subject, the 17th of the month is more likely
to have been the date of the saint’s death, for in his
humorous lines on “St Patrick’s Birthday,” he
wrote :—

‘On the eighth day of March it was, some people say,
That St Patrick at midnight he first saw the day ;
While others declare ’twas the ninth he was born,

And ’twas all a mistake between midnight and morn.”

But we are at present concerned, not so much
with the life of St Patrick and the date of his birth
or death, as with the natural history of the little
three-leaved plant with which his name is indis-
solubly connected. Here again authorities differ.
What the original Shamrock was is a question now
impossible to decide. We can only consider
probabilities and long usage. Turning to the cele-
brated Herbal of John Gerard, published in 1597,
we find his opinion to be that the true Shamrock is
the common Meadow Clover (7rifoliwm pratense).
The equally celebrated English botanist, John Ray,
was of the same opinion. More than ten years,
however, before Gerard’s work appeared, Stanihurst
in Holinshed’s Chronzcle (1586), wrote of ‘ water-
THE SHAMROCK 389

cresses, which they tearme shamrocks, roots, and
other herbs they feed upon” ; and Campion (/zs¢.
Ireland), writing in 1581, refers to “shamrocks,
watercresses, rootes,” which looks as if the Sham-
rock in Ireland was at one time esteemed as a salad,
or, at all events, was eaten when no better vegetable
food could be obtained. Fynes Morison says of the
Irish peasantry that “they willingly eate the herbe
shamrock, being of a sharpe taste ;”” and Spenser,
referring to the dire extremities to which the people
were reduced by the wars of Munster, remarked
“if they found a plot of watercresses or shamrocks,
there they flocked as to a feast fora time.”

The notion that the Shamrock (whatever its
botanical name) was used as a salad probably gave
rise to the supposition that the plant was the Wood-
sorrell (Oxadis acetosella), and in some parts of the
country (in Oxfordshire, for example), this plant is
known as the Shamrock. In Prior’s Popular Names
of British Plants (third ed. 1879), Shamrock is one
of the localnames given to Medicago lupulina. But
since in the absence of direct evidence on the point
we can only fall back on tradition and local custom,
it becomes a matter of interest to discover what is
the plant which is generally regarded as the
Shamrock, by the people of Ireland; the traditional
Shamrock, in fact, pointed out to children by their
parents in every succeeding generation. Statistics
on this point have been collected, but different con-
clusions have been arrived at. Dr Prior, who
derives the word from the Erse seamrog, com-
pounded of seamar, trefoil, and ag, little, states that
390 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the plants that for along time past have been re-
garded by the Irish as the true Shamrock, and
worn by them on St Patrick’s day, are the Black
Nonsuch (Medicago /upulina) and the Dutch Clover ;
and these, but chiefly and almost exclusively the
first, are sold for the national badge in Covent
Garden as well as in Dublin. Intermixed with
them are several other species of the same two
genera (Medicagoand Trifolium), but no plant of any
other genus. Of late years, however, certain writers
have adopted Mr Bicheno’s notion, and advocated
the claims of the Wood-sorrel (Oxalzs acetosedla)
but certainly without the smallest shadow of reason.
As to the theory of the watercress, Dr Prior points
out that its leaf, not being trifoliate, could not have
been used by St Patrick to illustrate the doctrine
of the Trinity. But this story is of comparatively
modern date, and is not to be found in any life of
the saint. The late Dr Moore, of Dublin, a well-
known Irish botanist, agreed with Dr Prior that
the plant which for many years has been recognised
in Ireland as the true Shamrock is Medicago
lupulina.

~ On the other hand, Messrs Britten and Holland
in their excellent Dictionary of English Plant
‘ Names (1878-1886) state that at the present day
Trifolium minus, L., is the plant most in repute as
the true Shamrock. It is this species, they say,
which forms most of the Shamrock sold in Covent
Garden on St Patrick’s Day, and in Ireland it is
used as such in the counties of Antrim, Down,
Meath, Fermanagh, Dublin, Wicklow, Carlow,
THE SHAMROCK 391

Westmeath, Wexford, Limerick, Waterford, Cork
and Kerry. Medicago lupulina occasionally takes
its place in London, and, according to the Cydede
fiibernica (p. 73) is also sold as such in Dublin.
Probably the conclusion at which one must arrive
(from the overwhelming evidence of the use of
Trifolium: minus throughout Ireland) is that this
plant, so far as can now be ascertained, is the true
Shamrock, but that other plants occasionally do
duty for it.

Mr Nathaniel Colgan, one of the most accurate
of Irish Botanists, in his Flora of the County Dublin
(1904), p. 307, says that White clover (Z7zfolium
repens) and the Lesser Yellow clover (7. dudzunz)
are almost equally in favour as the Irish national
badge. Mr Colgan uses Sibthorpe’s name, 7.
dubtum, instead of Z. minus, of Smith, for the
Lesser Yellow clover.
THE MISTLETOE AS FOOD FOR BIRDS

Ir is a popular notion that the only species of wild
bird which feeds on the berries of the Mistletoe is
the Mistletoe Thrush. Professor Newton, in the
fourth edition of Yarrell’s British Birds (vol. i.
p. 620), writes: ‘‘Its food consists of various
slugs and snails, some fruit in the season, and
(when they can be found) berries of all sorts,
including those of the Mistletoe, whence it derives
its most common name—a fact known to Aristotle.”

That the Song Thrush does not follow its
example in this respect is to be inferred from the
absence of any published evidence to the contrary,
and it is scarcely to be doubted in the case of so
common a bird, frequenting, as it does, our gardens
and copses within easy reach of daily observation,
that did it, even occasionally, take the berries of the
Mistletoe, the fact could hardly fail to have been
noticed by observant naturalists. The same may
be said of the Blackbird and Ring Ouzel, though
both of these birds feed regularly on the berries
of the yew and mountain ash in autumn, and of the
ivy in spring.

It is otherwise with the Fieldfare and Redwing,
for, although it is perhaps not generally known,
there is on record the evidence of an eye-witness

392
MISTLETOE AS FOOD FOR BIRDS = 393

that both these thrushes do at least occasionally—
perhaps only in severe weather when other food
fails them—feed upon the viscous berries of the
plant in question.

So long ago as 1842, the late Edwin Lees, of
Worcester, in a little volume abounding with
original observations on natural history, and
quaintly entitled Zhe Botanical Looker-out among
the Wild Flowers of England and Wales, remarks
on page 10 :—

“As the Mistletoe derives no nutriment from
the earth, and has therefore no necessity to fall to
the ground, its dissemination is wisely entrusted to
birds, which are tempted to feed on its white berries
when other supplies fail, and in cleaning their bills
on the rind of various trees frequented by them, are
sure to leave behind a few of the clammy seeds to
perpetuate the continuance of the parasite. It is
not improbable also, that the seeds pass through the
bodies of birds uninjured, as stated by old writers,
and are even benefited by the forward tendency
thus given them to earlier germination.”

To these general remarks he adds the following
precise observations, to which, as pertinent to my
inquiry, I desire to direct particular attention. He
says (p. 11), and the statement is repeated in the
second edition of his book (1851, p. 44) :—

“Birds of the Thrush family chiefly delight in
the Mistletoe berries, especially the Fieldfares and
Redwings; and as these generally fly in flocks,
keeping in one line of direction, it is not unusual
to see a corresponding line of Mistletoe bushes
394 RECREATIONS Ut a NALUnNALADL

ranging across the country for a long distance. |
have followed such a line till its continuity was
broken by a river, when I have almost invariably
found that its course was again continued from the
nearest tree that presented itself on the opposite
side of the water. I remember once observing a
long line of hedge overtopped by straggling haw-
thorns and scrubby maple (the author lived in
Worcestershire) every one of which were hung
with Mistletoe; but, curiously enough, an oak in
the centre of the hedge was passed over, though
the parasite was luxuriant on a hawthorn close
under the umbrage of the oak.”

The trees upon which this author had actually
seen Mistletoe growing are stated (of czt., pp. 16,
17) to have been apple, pear, lime, hawthorn,
sycamore, maple, mountain ash (uncommon), white
beam, hazel (very rarely), elm (in one locality),
Robinia pseud-acacia (local in shrubberies), willow,
ash, medlar (once), aspen (very rarely), and black
poplar, so excessively abundant in almost all recent
plantations in Worcestershire as literally to bend
some of the trees towards the ground. As to its
occurrence on the oak, which the author considered
to be “a very great rarity” (he himself having seen
but one such case in Earl Somers’s park at Eastnor,
near Ledbury), he thought its absence from that
tree might arise partly from the Romans having
destroyed all the Druidical Mistletoe, it being
remarkable that although so many old oaks are re-
corded as existing in this country, perhaps upwards
of one thousand years old, not one bears Mistletoe.
MISTLETOE AS FOOD FOR BIRDS 395

But if it be the fact that wandering thrushes, in
cleansing their bills upon the rind of trees
frequented by them, leave behind them some of the
clammy seeds to perpetuate the continuance of the
parasite, and it is no uncommon thing to see both
Fieldfares and Redwings perched upon oaks, we
may perhaps infer that the rind of the oak, unlike
that of the other trees mentioned, does not from its
hard dry nature afford a suitable xzdus for the
germination of the seed. At anyrate, the fact
remains that the author quoted had seen both
Fieldfares and Redwings feeding in winter on the
seeds of the Mistletoe, and in directing attention to
his statement on this point, which appears to have
been generally overlooked, it might be well to
inquire, when these birds are with us as winter
visitors, whether other naturalists from their own
observations are able to confirm his remarks.

The authors of Zhe Country Month by Month,
(Jj. A. Owen and G. S. Boulger), alluding to the
observations by Lees, without mentioning the
volume in which they were published, add nothing
in confirmation of his statement. They would
have done well, perhaps, to have quoted what
he has to say on the derivation of the word
‘‘ Mistletoe,” since his explanation has as much to
recommend it as their own statement that “ while
tan or teznn, the old spelling of the last syllable,
admittedly signifies ‘a twig,’ the mzstel (sic) is
connected with mzs¢ in the sense of winter gloom or
fog.” Lees at least quotes authorities for his view.
He says :—
396 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

‘There is an obsolete old English word, mtstton,
which is employed even in the writings of Boyle,
and this is defined in Dr Johnson’s original folio
edition of his Dictionary as ‘‘the state of being
mingled.” Now, this is truly the state of our plant,
which is intermingled with the foliage of various
trees, and mixes up their juices with its own, and is
now, indeed, in rural places still simply called
mistle. If to this we add the old English Zod or éoe,
signifying ‘bush,’ we have at once the derivation,
meaning the mingled or compound bush.”

This was written in 1842, and seems generally
to have escaped notice, or at least criticism. Pro-
fessor Skeat, in his valuable Ztymological Dictionary
of the English Language, says nothing of ‘‘the old
English ¢od or ¢oe,” but explains the word as com-
pounded of A.S. mzste/, which could be used alone
to mean ‘‘ Mistletoe,” and A.S. ¢az, Icel. fezun, a
twig. He adds that the word mzsteZ is clearly a
mere diminution of zzzst, which in E. means
“vapour” or “fog,” and in A.S. ‘‘ gloom,” though
the reason for the name is not quite clear.

With this explanation from such an authority on
English etymology we must rest content, and it is
practically indorsed by Professor Newton, who in a
footnote (p. 260) to his article on the Mistletoe
Thrush above quoted, after giving this derivation
with some amplification, relies upon it to justify his
opinion that the proper name of the bird should be
written in full ‘‘ Mistletoe Thrush,” and not as
commonly “ Missel Thrush.”
BIRD-LIFE IN KENSINGTON GARDENS

To the naturalist who is cooped up in London for
many months in the year it is sometimes refresh-
ing to take an early morning walk through one of
the London parks and study what little bit of
nature still remains in the heart of a great city.
It is still possible to find spots here and there
which are entirely out of sight of houses, and
where, walking on green turf and looking upward
through the branches of venerable elms or plane
trees, one gets a glimpse of country sky, and hears
now and then the note of some country bird, a
temporary sojourner like oneself in London.
Nowhere, perhaps, is this little bit of rus 2 urbe
more striking than in Kensington Gardens. Here
may be found some really charming glades, bordered
by fine old trees, which in summer cast a grateful
shade over the turf below. The enjoyment to be
derived from a contemplation of these glades will
depend upon the time of year at which we walk
there. If we select the season when rooks with
noisy ‘“‘caws” are busy gathering sticks to repair
their old nests, and the spring notes of thrushes,
blackbirds, and tits fall pleasantly upon the ear, we
may fancy ourselves miles away in the country,
instead of in the very middle of London. It would
be difficult to say how many species of birds may
397
398 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

be regarded as permanently resident in Kensington
Gardens, but it is certain that a goodly list might
be made of those which have been periodically
observed there. Rooks and Jackdaws, from their
size, are amongst the most conspicuous. The latter
often quit the park for the house-tops, and before
the daily traffic has commenced may be seen
hovering about the high road, occasionally swoop-
ing down to carry off the oats dropped from the
nosebag of the cab-horses. There was atime when
the Magpie nested in St James’s Park, as did the
Raven and Kite in Hyde Park; but those days
have long since passed away, and perhaps no
observation of the Magpie in Kensington Gardens
has been made, or at least recorded, since Yarrell,
in his Astory of British Birds, wrote that he
had himself once counted twenty-three there. This
statement, to many persons, may seem almost
incredible; but not only does the good authority
for it forbid us to doubt it, but it is a fact well
known to ornithologists that magpies in autumn and
winter assemble in flocks and roost together in
plantations, as many as thirty or forty having been
counted at one time.

From its general similarity toa Rook, when seen
at a distance, the Carrion Crow probably often
escapes notice. It is nevertheless a constant
frequenter of Kensington Gardens, and in the
summer of 1887 a pair had a nest there from which
the young were duly hatched. During the time
the young were being reared, the old birds might be
seen close to the water's edge foraging for food,
IN KENSINGTON GARDENS 399

and numbers of young ducks did they kill and
carry off. The broods gradually dwindled down
from ten or a dozen to two or three; and one old
duck in particular, which had hatched off all her
eggs safely, no sooner had them afloat than the
crows began to molest them, and she lost all but
one. So long as they were swimming about they
were safe, but as soon as they landed, and gota
little way from the edge of the water, down would
come one of the crows with along “stoop” likea
hawk, and cut off the retreat of some luckless duck-
ling before it could regain the water, and notwith-
standing a charge from the old duck, who would
bravely rush to the rescue. The nest of this duck
was in a singular position. “Close to the basins in
Kensington Gardens, as everybody knows, there
stands a huge trunk of what was once a fine elm
tree. It is 22 feet in height, and now serves for
no other purpose apparently than to hang the
Royal Humane Society’s drag on. At the top of
this great stump the duck referred to had her nest,
andat this height from the ground fourteen ducklings
were hatched. How the mother would get them
down wasa problem. It was thought she might
perhaps take them one by one in her bill, or, like
the guillemot and other cliff birds, carry them
singly in the hollow of her back between the
uplifted wings, skimming down to the water with
them ; but one of the park-keepers, who was desired
to watch, assured the writer that the old duck
“called them off,’ and that they took “headers”
one by one on to the gravel path below. He fully
400 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

expected they would be killed by the fall; but,
after tumbling over on their sides, righted them-
selves, and waddled down to the water, apparently
none the worse. They seemed as collapsible as
indiarubber balls. ,

While watching the Crows at the water’s edge
in the early morning, one might often see Wood-
pigeons come down to drink. There are nests in
Kensington Gardens every summer, and the owners
would sometimes suffer a tolerably near approach ;
so quickly do birds discover when they are in safe
quarters. It is curious that none of the numerous
flocks of house pigeons in London are ever to be
seen feeding out in the parks. Jn the country it is
quite a common occurrence to see pigeons out in the
fields along way from the farms ; and one would have
supposed that in London the green grass of the parks
would have proved attractive ; but probably the birds
are too well fed to make it necessary to wander far
from where they habitually roost. Several years ago,
when there were more trees standing, and a good
many old ones amongst them, Woodpeckers of
three sorts might be seen. Yarrell states that the
Greater Spotted Woodpecker used to breed in
Kensington Gardens, but it has not been known to
do so of late years. This bird is now less often seen
than the Lesser Spotted Woodpecker, which is the
commoner species round London, and which was
detected in Kensington Gardens in May 1878—
possibly since then by other observers. In
November 1885 the rarer Green Woodpecker was
seen here, and on the 11th of December following
IN KENSINGTON GARDENS 401

one of these birds—perhaps the same one—was
reported to have been seen by a different corre-
spondent, while a third observer reported one in
Holland Park. That woodpeckers are not visible
more frequently is due perhaps to their peculiar
habit of dodging round the far side of a tree at the
approach of an intruder, and on this account it is
‘remarkable how difficult it is to catch sight of one
even in wooded parts of the country where they are
perhaps not uncommon.

The Nuthatch also is almost as clever in keep-
ing out of sight, but its loud twittering note often
betrays it, and the writer has several times heard
and seen it in Kensington Gardens. Tits of two
kinds are tolerably common there, and apparently
resident throughout the year. These are the Coal
Tit and the Blue Tit—the former sombre enough
at all times, the latter looking very soot-begrimed
from contact with the smoked branches of the
London trees, so different from the brightly-
coloured tits one meets with in the country.
Doubtless they find convenient nesting-places in
holes in some of the old trees, many of which are
tenanted by Starlings, which are almost always to
be seen in the gardens.

Amongst other small birds, the Chaffinch is most
conspicuous here, although it cannot be called
common, and disappears in the winter. It is
perhaps commonest in spring, when its loud song
is heard, and the flash of white in its wings attracts
attention as it springs up from the foot of some

old tree at our approach.
2c
402 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

In summer, one of the commonest small birds in
Kensington Gardens is the Spotted Flycatcher.
Perched upon one of the lower branches of an elm
or chestnut, it may be seen darting into the air to
catch a passing insect, and returning to the same
branch. Should we wander beyond the boundary
fence, and saunter into Hyde Park on a bright
morning when the summer birds are beginning to
arrive, we may see both the Wheatear and the
Whinchat in the open ground between the Maga-
zine and the Marble Arch. I have many times
seen both these birds there, and on one occasion
counted five wheatears in sight at once. Larks
also periodically make their appearance on the
same ground; but this is beyond the precincts of
Kensington Gardens, where there are yet several
other birds to note.

The House Martins that skim about over the
Serpentine and the Round Pond in summer time,
live in Westbourne Terrace and other streets in that
neighbourhood, where the writer has seen them
visiting their nests as late as the first week of
October ministering to the wants of a late brood.

Kingfishers occasionally pay what may be termed
‘“‘a flying visit” to the Serpentine, and in the
summer of 1886 the writer saw one several times
at “The Dell,” where, in the same summer, two
broods of Moorhens were reared. It was very
amusing to watch the young birds of the second
brood being fed by those of the first brood, not
very much bigger than themselves. The Little
Grebe, or Dabchick, has been repeatedly seen on
IN KENSINGTON GARDENS 403

the Round Pond and on the Serpentine. In the
autumn there are sometimes a good many there.

Strange as itmayseem, the Woodcock has several
times been flushed in Kensington Gardens, and
may almost be looked upon as an annual winter
visitant to the parks and gardens of London. An
article by the present writer, entitled ‘‘Woodcocks in
London,” which appeared in The Fredd of February
14, 1885, will convey some idea of the frequency
of this bird’s visits to the metropolis, and the
occasionally remarkable circumstances under which
it has been met with. Snipe have been occasion-
ally seen, or picked up dead under gas lights, but
the records of their occurrence are not nearly so
numerous as those relating to the Woodcock. Even
Gulls and Terns are not wanting to complete the
picture of bird-life in Kensington Gardens, for at
the period of migration in spring and autumn, when
these sea-birds are on their way to and from their
breeding haunts, they pass over the metropolis and
drop down upon the water in the London parks,
where they sometimes spend a few days before
continuing their journey. The Common and
Lesser Terns, the Black-headed Gull, and the
Kittiwake have all been detected at various times
on these inland waters, affording by their graceful
evolutions and snow-white plumage a charming
spectacle for sightseers in London.
THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THE KITE

StRoLLING into the well-known auction rooms of
Mr Stevens in King Street, Covent Garden, where
all sorts of natural curiosities are from time to time
dispersed, my attention was attracted by a stuffed
specimen of the Kite (A/tlvus regalis), which, accord-
ing to the sale catalogue, was obtained many years
ago in Monk’s Wood, Huntingdonshire, and had
belonged to the late Mr Doubleday, of Epping, a
well-known collector of birds.1 For the naturalist,
amore interesting souvenir of the past could not
well be found; for Monk’s Wood was one of the
last-known breeding haunts of this bird in the
Midland Counties, and the specimen before me,
which from another source | learnt had been re-
ceived by Mr Doubleday “in the flesh,” had no
doubt been treasured by its former owner as one of
the rarest of British birds. Knowing something of
the former history of the Kite as a resident in
England, it was perhaps not surprising that I
should find myself bidding for so interesting a

‘Henry Doubleday of Epping died on June 29, 1875, aged
sixty-seven, having disposed of his collection of stuffed birds
during his lifetime. It was sold by auction at the Cock Hotel,
Epping, August 23, 1871. The specimen of the Kite above

mentioned, together with an adult female Goshawk, obtained near
Yarmouth, formed Lot 85 in the Sale Catalogue and realised La.

404
DISAPPEARANCE OF THE KITE $405

relic of the past, and in less than half an hour I left
the room the happy possessor of the bird in question,
which I subsequently presented to the Museum of
the Essex Field Club.

Contemplating its great forked tail and ample
pinions, one’s thoughts naturally wandered back to
the days when the Royal Kite or Fork-tailed Glead,
as it was locally called, was one of the commonest
birds in this country. Time was when it was
stringently protected as a useful scavenger in great
towns, and history tells us how foreigners of note,
sufficiently distinguished to have their travels
written down, were struck on coming to England
with the number and tameness of the kites which
they saw here. Thus so long ago as 1465, when
Baron von Rozmital, brother to the Queen of
Bohemia, journeyed to England, and, travelling by
way of Sandwich and Canterbury to London, stood
upon old London Bridge, which he described as
having buildings upon it throughout its entire
length, he was struck with the number of Kites
which he saw, to injure which, he was told, was a
serious offence. This remark was confirmed some-
what later by the French naturalist, Pierre Belon,
(1555). and by Clusius (Charles L’Ecluse), who
visited England in 1571, and in a note to his trans-
lation of Belon’s work observed that it was forbidden
to kill these birds, since they collected and devoured
the refuse of the street, and even of the river itself.

James I. protected kites for another reason;
they furnished the best of flights to his trained
Jerfalcons, a sport to which he was much addicted,
406 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

and on which he lavished large sums of money.
Kite-hawking, indeed, though an expensive amuse-
ment by reason of the value of the hawks employed,
was long practised by English falconers, even so late
as the first quarter of the present century, when the
Earl of Orford and Colonel Thornton of Thornville
Royal, with the members of the Falconers’ Club,
used to ‘‘range for Kitenear Elden Gap” and over
Thetford Warren.

Monk’s Wood and Alconbury Hill were then
the favourite haunts of this bird, and some interest-
ing testimony of its former abundance there is
afforded by Colonel Birch Reynardson in his
Reminiscences of a Gentleman Coachman (1875,
p. 74). He says :—

“ Within a few miles of Stilton, and between
Stilton and Stamford, is a hill called Alconbury
Hill. Inthe days I am writing of (about the year
1824, and from before that time to 1828 or 1829)
there used to be in that part of the country an
incredible number of Kites—the Fork-tailed Kite,
or what in Scotland were called Gleads, the red
feathers of whose forked tail were famous for wings
of salmon flies. These birds used to be soaring
over the road and over a wood called Monk’s
Wood. In almost every direction (when travelling
by the Stamford Regent coach) one used actually
to see them sitting in the middle of the road, and
on one occasion | remember counting as many as
twenty-seven in the air at the same time. The
preservation of game, I suppose, has got rid of
them, for no such bird is to be seen now; and it is
DISAPPEARANCE OF THE KITE = 407

wonderful how in a few years these birds have
become almost extinct throughout England. I
have not seen one for at least thirty-six years (z.e.,
not since 1839).

The late Mr Stevenson, in the first volume of

 

THE KITE.

his Birds of Norfolk, published in 1866, could only
write of the Kite in the past tense. In former years,
he says, this bird occasionally remained with us to
breed, and half a century back used to be rather
common in Norfolk. The last of which he had any
knowledge was trapped close to its ancient haunt at
Croxton, near Thetford, in November 1852. Dr
408 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

Churchill Babington has mentioned some more
recent instances of the occurrence of the Kite in
Norfolk and Suffolk in his volume on the birds of
the latter county (1886), but he is compelled to add:
‘This bird has now become so rare as to be hardly
ever seen in the county. Scarcely any specimens
have been obtained in the last five-and-twenty
years.”

In Lincolnshire the Kite, as a resident and
breeding species, lingered somewhat longer, a fact
which is probably to be attributed to its being still
able to find concealment during the nesting season
in some of the great woods of that county. Mr
Adrian, of Lincoln, informed Professor Newton, in
1864, that Kites in Lincolnshire were then becoming
scarcer every year. This he attributed partly to the
destruction of the birds, and partly to that of their
favourite haunts, by the felling and stubbing of the
woods, in two of which 100 acres had been cut down
since the beginning of the year, and this in the best
locality.

In his account of the Kite published in the fourth
edition of Yarrell’s Brztish Birds, Professor Newton
remarks: ‘“‘ There were nests in Lincolnshire until
the year 1857, but, owing in a great measure to the
cutting down of the woods, it has probably been
driven from that locality.” Happily this has not
proved to be the case. A nest of the Kite was
found in Bullington Wood, near Wragby, in that
county, in 1870, and there is reason to believe that
the species lingered there even a few years longer.

According to Jabez Allies, author of the
DISAPPEARANCE OF THE KITE = 4o9

Antiquities and Folklore of Worcestershire, in his
young days the Kite was well known at Alfrick,
about six miles north of Great Malvern :—

‘There was a coppice there in which they
might often be heard ‘mewing,’ as the country
people called their cry, but guns and persecution
drove them away. In 1850 the Kites returned to
their old haunts at Alfrick, for at that time the
principal house and estate there, called the
Grimsend, had fallen into Chancery, and was
unoccupied and waste.” *

In the West of England the Kite must at one
time have been common enough. We learn from
a good observer in West Gloucestershire, J. L.
Knapp, of Thornbury, that in his day (1829) these
birds had a habit of roosting in company instead of
in pairs, as is the case with most birds of prey.
On this point he relates the following curious
capo ielice in his Journal of a Naturalist -—

“IT can confusedly remember a very extraordin-
ary capture of these birds when I wasaboy. Roost-
ing one winter evening on some very lofty elms, a
fog came on during the night, which froze early in
the morning, and fastened the feet of the poor Kites
so firmly to the boughs that some adventurous
youths brought down, I think, fifteen of them so
secured !’ 5

In one point of detail it is probable that the
writer was mistaken. It is more likely that the
inability of these birds to move was occasioned by

1 Lees’ Pictures of Nature around: the Malvern fills, 1856
(p. 17).
410 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the congelation of the moisture upon the wings,
which prevented the expansion of the flight
feathers; and that such an accident does some-
times occur has been vouched for in the case of
Rooks by Gilbert White in his Vatural History of
Selborne,' and by Daniel in the Supplement to his
Rural Sports (p. 636).

The Kite is said to have been common in the
neighbourhood of Dartmoor at the end of the last
century (Bray’s Zamar and Tavy, vol. i., p. 346),
and the late Mr Rodd, of Penzance, thought that
no hawk was better known in the large woodland
districts of the central part of Devon when he was
a schoolboy at Buckfastleigh. He was born in
1810, and could depose to its nesting in King’s
Wood, near Holme Chase, on the eastern borders
of Dartmoor. Messrs D’Urban and Mathew, how-
ever, in their Bzrds of Devon (p. 155), express the
opinion that the Kite was never so common in
Devonshire, or any of the south-western counties,
as it was formerly in the home counties and in other
parts of England. The Gloucestershire naturalist
above referred to has hinted at the cause of this :—

‘Our copses present it with no enticing
harbourage, and our culture scares it. In former
years I was intimately acquainted with this bird,
but its numbers seem greatly on the decline, having
been destroyed or driven away to lonely places, or
to the most extensive woodlands.”

For “lonely places” we have to cross the Welsh

10n November 13, 1771, Gilbert White saw sixteen Fork-
tailed Kites at once on the downs.
DISAPPEARANCE OF THE KITE 411

border, and it is some satisfaction to know that, in
the midst of the daily persecution which attends
the larger birds of prey, and some even of the
smaller kinds, the Kite still finds a home in at least
three of the Welsh counties, where so recently as
1892 and 1893 I was made acquainted with their
nesting-places. I abstain, however, from naming
even the counties, lest by so doing I should unwit-
tingly hasten the disappearance of a species whose
extirpation every true naturalist would deplore.

In 1822 the Kite was very numerous in
Glamorganshire, where it used to breed regularly
in Leekwith Wood, Cardiff, and in the Aberdare
Valley, where Lord Aberdare had seen and counted
as many as five-and-twenty Kites and Buzzardsabove
the Duffryn Craig. In 1846a young Kite taken from
the nest at the Devil’s Bridge in Cardiganshire lived
in captivity until December 1873 (Zoologzst, 1874).

In Scotland, the Glead, as it is there called, still
“struggles for existence,” and in three or four
counties that might be named it still breeds annually
in wild places, remote from the haunts of man.
The late Duke of Argyll once saw as many as nine
Kites on the wing at one time at Inveraray. In
July 1876, being at Brighton, I called on Pratt, the
bird-stuffer, and there saw two young Kites which
were being preserved for the late Mr E. T. Booth,
who had procured them either in Perthshire or Ross-
shire. They were “ branchers,” and had they been
allowed to live would soon have been able to fly
well. They had nearly got rid of their down, but
the tail was not yet’ forked. They may be seen in
412 RECREATIONS OF A NATURALIST

the collection which was formed by Mr Booth in his
beautiful gallery of British birds, inthe Dyke Road,
which, by his liberality, has since his death become
the property of the Corporation of Brighton.

From what I have seen of the Kite in parts of
France, Holland, Greece, and Thessaly, where at
close quarters I have sometimes watched three or
four on the wing at once, I am disposed to echo the
opinion of the Gloucestershire naturalist in regard
to it. Struck with its grand appearance on the
wing, he described it as ‘‘the finest native bird that
we possess, and all its deportment partakes of a
dignity peculiar to itself, well becoming a denizen
of the forest or the park.” More’s the pity that it
should be now so scarce.
INDEX

ABERDARE, Lord, on the Kite in Glamorganshire, 411
Adder or Viper, sheltering young, 370

figured, 373

fElfric, Archbishop, Co@loguy of, 223

Agreement, Ancient Hunting, 68

Ainsworth Davis, Prof., Agricultural Zoology, 381, 382
Albatross, Wandering, 331, 342, 347

—— figured, 342

—— measurements and weight, 342-344, 345

Allen, J. F., on Migration of Birds, 271

Allies, Jabez, Antiguzties and Folklore of Worcestershire, 409
Anderson, John, falconer, 4

Andrews, J., on Cuckoo seen in March, 360

Angler of the fifteenth century, 228

Angling, 222-229

Antlers, 74-83

composition of, 76

—— date of shedding, 74

gnawed by deer, 78, 79

Aphides, 362

Aphrophora bifasciata, 361, 365

spumaria, 361, 362

Aplin, O. V., on March Cuckoos, 357

Apteryx, 330°

Archbishop AE lfric, 223

—— Boniface, 313

Comyn, 67

Corboyle, 164

—— Nevill, 315

Argyll, Duke of, on Kites at Inveraray, 411

Aristotle, History of Animals, 139

Armitage, Ernest, on the Red-leg in Hertfordshire, 125
Astley, Art of Riding (1584), 141

Athole, Duke of, on the age of deer, 82

Avocet, 59, 210

 

 

 

 

 

 

_ Basincton, Birds of Suffolk, 128, 297
on the Kite in Suffolk, 408
413

 
414 INDEX

Baikie and Heddle, Astoria Naturalis Orcadensis, 127
Baillie Grohman, W. A., on Eagles and Chamois, 336
Baldwin, Capt., Large and Small Game of Bengal, 159
—— on the Snow Leopard, 160

Ballantine, Peter, a Scotch falconer, 4

Balston, R. J., keeper’s report on Viper, 373

Barr, John and Robert, falconers, 4

Barrington, Daines, Gilbert White’s letters to, 29, 31
“ Bat-fowling”’ described, 320

Bats, fish-eating, 234-246

—— fruit-eating, 235, 239

—— insectivorous, 235, 239

—— sub-orders of, 235

Beachy Head, 39

Bearded Tit on the Broads, 207

—— in Sussex, 58

Bell, British Quadrupeds, 74

Bellamy, Watural History of South Devon, 122

Belon, Pierre, on Kites in England, 405

Bennett, Dr George, on the Wandering Albatross, 342
Berners, Dame Juliana, 224, 226

Bieber, N. E., on Deer-shooting in Bolivia, 339

Birch Reynardson, Col., on the former abundance of the Kite, 406
Bird, Rev. M. C., on Norfolk Birds, 212

Bird-life on the Broads, 201-212

—— in Kensington Gardens, 397-403

Birds of double passage, 263

and Lighthouses, 258-277

—-— carried on migration by larger ones, 348-353
—— of Japan, 252-253

—— small, alighting on ships at sea, 353

—— the largest that fly, 330-347

Bittern on the Broads, 210

—— American, 324

—— eggs protected by law, 316

Blackbird, food of, 392

Blackcap, arrival of, 266

Blackcock shooting, 101-107

Blackgame, decrease of, 108-112

—— and pheasants, 102, 112

—_— best districts for, 109

—— food of, ror, 111

—— group of, 103

—w— haunts of, 108

 
INDEX 415

Blackgame, on Dartmoor, 109

in Ireland, 110

—— in the New Forest, 110

—— in Norfolk, 110

in Wales, 110

Bladderwort, fishes trapped by, 230-233

Blanford, W. T., on Preropus medius, 246

Blencowe, R. W., 39

Blomefield, L. (formerly Jenyns), 35

—— Manual of Vertebrates, 36

—w— Snare for Wheatear, 37

Blount, Ancient Tenures, 67

Blundevile, on Horsemanship (1565), 141

Blyth, Edward, on wild Cats in India, 155, 159
Bonaparte, Prince Charles, on Swallows at sea, 265
Book of St Albans, 1, 141, 223, 227

Booth, E. T., capture of young Kites, 411

migration of the Goldcrest, 352, 352

Borrer, William, on March Cuckoos, 357

Boulger, G. S., on Mistletoe, 395

“« Bow rake,” the meaning explained, 71

Boyce, Rev. J., on the age of deer, 83

Boyd Dawkins, Prof., on fossil Cats in England, 154
Bradgate Park, Leicestershire, 67, $1

Bray, Zamar and Tavy, 410

Brent Geese, 53, 59, 60, 62

Brereton, Sir William, on Decoys, 213

British Association, Committee on Migration, 268, 275, 280
Britten and Holland, Dictionary of Englsh Plant Names, 390
Broads, Bird-life on the, 201-212

Brodrick, William, falconer, 5

Browne, Sir Thomas, Account of Norfolk Birds, 113, 318
—— Vulgar Errors, 369

Brown Goode, on Snakes sheltering their young, 374, 375
Bunting, Cirl, in Sussex, 58

—— Reed, 13, 15, 25, 205

Burchell, Zravels in South Africa, 346

“ Burning the Water ” described, 321-322

Bustard, Great, 345, 346

—— Australian, measurements and weight of, 346
—— Cape, measurements and weight of, 345, 347
eggs protected by law, 316

measurements and weight of, 345

Buzzards, 86, 87

 

 

 

 

 
416 INDEX

Byam, Capt. George, on the measurements of Condors, 338
—— Wanderings in the Western Republics, 338

Campion, History of Lreland (1581), 389
Cannock Chase, 65, 70, 71

Canute’s Forest Laws, 63

—— the authenticity of the code disputed, 63
Caracal, used for hunting, 150, 161

Carp, weight of Indian, 337

Carrion Crow in Kensington Gardens, 398, 400
Carter, James, on March Cuckoos, 357
Cassowary, 330

Cat, origin of the domestic, 145-169

—— a mummied, 147

—— Egyptian fowler’s, 149

—-— Egyptian name for, 148

—w— mechanism of the claw, 157

—— Pére Huc on Cat’s eyes, 148

—— Position of, in the Order Carnivora, 155
—— skeleton of, 156

—— skull of, 156

—— unknown to the Greeks, 151

—— wooden case for mummied, 146
Chaffinch, the, in London, 401

Chafin, Avzecdotes of Cranbourn Chase, 69
Chapman, Abel, on Woodpigeons, 137
Bird-life on the Borders, 137

—— Wild Spain, 335 2.

Charles II., his fondness for Wheatears, 31
Charnwood Forest, 67

Cheeta, used for hunting, 150, 157, 161, 170-177
—— exhibited at Windsor, 176

— — hood for, 177

Chiffchaff, arrival of the, 354

Clark, Bracy, On the Bots in Hlorses, 142
—— James, Hoot of the Horse (1770), 141
—— Shoeing of Horses, 141

Clarke, J., of Lynton, on the age of deer, 82
Clarke and Roebuck, Handbook of Yorkshire Vertebrates, 118
Claypole, Prof., on Wagtails carried on the backs of Cranes, 350
Clifford, School of Horsemanship (1585), 141
Clover, 388, 390, 391

Clusius, on Kites in London (1571), 405
Cobbold, Dr Spencer, on Grouse Disease, 97

 

 
INDEX 417

Colgan, H., on the Irish Shamrock, 391
Collie, origin of the name, 184 7.
Collyns, Chase of the Wild Red Deer, 79
Colquhoun, John, on Grouse Disease, 98
Commissioners of Irish Lights, 275
—— of Northern Lights, 275
Comyn, Archbishop of Dublin, his deer-leap, 67
Condor, South American, 331, 337, 341, 347
—— distribution of the, 337
—— figured, 339
—— measurements and weights, 345
Cook, Captain, on weight of Steamer Duck, 340
— Captain T. H., on supposed Woodcock in Straits of
Magellan, 289
Cooper, Athene Cantabrigiensis, 317
Coot, 23, 209
Corboyle, Archbishop, Canons of, 164
Cordeaux, John Birds of the Humber District, 117
on March Cuckoos, 357
—— on the Red-legged Partridge, 117
Cormorant, formerly nesting in Norfolk, 210
—— mode of fishing, 46
Coward and Oldham, Birds of Cheshire, 119, 213
Cox, The Gentleman’s Recreation (1697), 320
Crake, Spotted, on the Broads, 209
Crane, in Sussex marshes, 59
—— eggs protected by law, 316
— — food of the, 317
—— former breeding haunts of, 316, 319
—— figure of Japanese, 248
—— hawking in Japan, 251
Cranes carrying small birds, 349
—— at Christmas, 312-319
— —- tame in the Middle Ages, 315
Crow, Grey, feeding on mussels, 13
Crows in Kensington Gardens, 398, 400
Cruelty in sport, 10, 11
Crustacea of Japan, 255
Cuckoo, arrival of, 356
—— carrying eggs in bill, 377
ane figured, 355
—~— flying in company, 25
— — folklore of the, 368
—-— heard in March, 354-360
2D

 
418 INDEX

Cuckoo spit, 361-368

—— the work of an insect, 361

—— figured, 365

—w— antidotes for, 366

——— eaten by pheasants, 367

Cunningham, Robert, Matural History of the Strait of Magellan,
339, 340

Curlew, 21, 24, 42, 56

—— figured, 42

—— Sandpiper, 43, 56

Dapcaick, or Little Grebe, 25

Dallas, W. S., on the structure of the Mole Cricket, 386
Daniel, Rural Sports, 114, 294, 410
Darwin, Waturalists’ Voyage, 338

—— on the origin of the Cat, 153

on Utricularia, 231

Das Erste Buch (1472) 223

Day, Dr F., on fish-eating Bats, 240

De Blainville, on mummied Cats, 154
Decoys in Cheshire, 213

—— in Holland, 214-217

— — in Ireland, 219, 220

—— in Scotland none, 218

—— seventeenth century, 213

“* Deer-fald,” explained, 64

Deer-leaps, 63-72

Deer-shooting by night, 320

De Grey, Compleat Horseman (1639), 141
Denison, reprint of Van der Goes, 228, 229
Derham, PAzlosophical Letters, 381
Desert Lynx, or Caracal, 150, 161
Dobson, G. E., on Woctilio leporinus, 236
Dotterel on migration in Sussex, 58
Doubleday, Henry, 404

Dragonfly, a Japanese, 256

Drayton, Polyolbion, 318

Duck and Mallard, 15, 59, 208, 211
—— eggs protected, 316

—— Golden-eye, 49, 60

—— Long-tailed, 60

—-- Pochard, 211

—— Steamer, of the Falkland Islands, 340
—— Tufted, 60, 211

 
INDEX 419

Dudeney, John, a Southdown shepherd, 38

Dunling, 43, 44, 56, 304

Dunoyer de Noirmont, on hunting with the Cheeta, 172, 175
D’Urban and Mathew, Birds of Devonshire, 122, 410

—w— on Woodcock in Devon, 296

Dutt, W., Zhe Norfolk Broads, 211

EacLg, Golden, 86, 88, 332, 333, 335) 341

—— Imperial, 333

—— in bronze, 259

—— Pallas’s Sea, 336

—-— Sea or white-tailed, 332, 333

Earle, Prof., Saxon Chronicles, 64

Ebeling, Adolf, on Wagtails carried by Storks and Cranes, 350,

351
Edward I., his Jerfalcons, 314
Elizabeth of York, Wardrobe Accounts of, 315
Elliot, Sir Walter, on Leopard and Panther, 159
—-~ Coues, on European Woodcock in America, 288, 289
Emu, 330
Experience in Birds, 273
Exton Park, Rutlandshire, the deer-leap at, 66

FALcon, Gentle, 1, 6

—— Hooded, 9

Falconer and Hawks, 11

Falconers of France, 3

—— professional, 4

Farquharson, Dr, on Grouse Disease, 98
Fascination of Light, the, 320-329
Faulkener, Rev. W. A., on arrival of the Cuckoo, 358
Fayrer, Sir Joseph, on shed antlers, 80
Feilden, Col. H., Birds of the Fiiroe Islands, 286
Fieldfares, 392, 393, 395

Fish-eating Bats, 234-246

Fishes of Japan, 255

—— trapped by Bladderwort, 230-233
Fishing, the oldest book on, 222
Fitz-Osborne, William, anecdote of, 313
Fleet, Glimpses of our Sussex Ancestors, 40
Flycatchers in Kensington Gardens, 402
Fosbrooke, Encyclopedia of Antiquities, 315
—— Lives of the Barons of Berkeley, 65
Fowler’s Dog, the, 61
420 INDEX

Fowler’s shelter, the, 57

Fraser, on fishing bats, 237

Frederick II., De Arte Venand?, 161, 172
Freeman, Gage Earle, 5

Frog-hopper, 363, 365

Frost, John, falconer, 4

Fuller, Worthies of England, 27, 28
Fynes Morison, on the Shamrock, 389

GADWALL, 211

Gallwey, Sir R. P., on Decoys, 213, 218, 220, 221
Gape-worm, Syngamus trachealis, 367

Garden Warbler and Cuckoo Spit, 367

Garganey on the Broads, 211

Garner, Watural History of Staffordshire, 70, 119
Gatcombe, John, on a pied Woodcock, 297
Gatke, H., on the migration of birds, 258
Gerard’s Herbal (1597), 388

Gesner on hunting-leopards, 176

Gillanders, C., on the arrival of the Cuckoo, 359
Gilpin, Forest Scenery, 73

Gin, cruelty of the iron, 12

Giraldus Cambrensis, Zopographia Hibernica, 313
Godwit, Bar-tailed, 43, 56

—_— Black-tailed, 44, 209, 210

Goes, Matthias van der, 227, 229

Golden-eye, 49, 60

Goldcrest, migration of the, 352, 353

Goosander, 60

Goose, Brent, 53, 59, 60, 62

Goshawk, 1, 7-9, 12

Gosse, P. H., on food of Bats, 236, 244

Gould, John, on the Australian Bustard, 346
—-—~ on Swallows in Australia, 266

Gray, Robert, Birds of IWest of Scotland, 101, 333, 336
Grebe, Eared, 49, 60

—— Great-crested, 210, 211

—— Little, 25, 49, 60

—-- Sclavonian, 49, 60

Green, E. E., on U¢ricularia, 232

-—— J. F., Ocean Birds, 344

Greenshank, 56

Green, Stainforth, on Cuckoo Spit, 366

Grey-lag Geese, 60
INDEX 421

Grouse, 86

—— a dead, 93

—— disease, 97-98

—_— flight of, 96

—— food of, 95

—— haunts of, 108

—— nest of, 94

—— the ways of, 92-100

—--- weight of, 97

Grouse-hawking, 8, 10, 104

Guernsey Partridge, 127

Guillemot, 48

—-— mode of carrying young, 376

Gull, Black-headed, 18, 22, 25, 26, 46, 56, 210
—— Common, 46

——- Glaucous, 48

—— Greater Black-backed, 46

—— Herring, 46, 56

-—— Lesser Black-backed, 46

-—— Little, 48

Gulls and Terns in London, 403
Giinther, Dr A., on fish-eating Bats, 240
Gurney, J. H., on the Viper sheltering its young, 371

Hala, the, of Domesday explained, 64

Hancock, Birds of Northumberland, 218

Harrier, Montagu’s, 58

Harringworth Park, Northamptonshire, the deer-leap in, 69
Harvie Brown, J. A., on the Wild Cat in Scotland, 165
Haslewood, edition of the Book of St Albans, 224

Haunts, birds returning to old, 267

Hawking, 1-12

Height at which birds travel, 277

Hehn, Wanderings of Plants and Animals, 253

Heligoland and its lighthouse, 258
‘Heredity of habit, 273

Heron, 210

—~— eggs protected by law, 316

—— fishing, 325

—— Great Blue, of America, 326, 327

—-— light emitted by, 323

Hesketh, Sir Thomas, 119

Heuglin, Dr von, on small birds carried on the backs o1 Cranes,

359 351
422 INDEX

Hodgson, on Leopard and Panther, 159

Holder, C. F., Leaving Lights, 326, 327
Holinshead’s Chronicle (1586), 388

Holtrop, Monumens Typographiques des Pays Bas, 229
Hopkins, Lieut., his Wheatear pie, 30

Horse, the, and its historians, 138-144

Houghton, Rev. W., on ancient Cats, 152

Hound’s Down in the New Forest, deer-leap at, 73
House-Martin, 354

—— in London, 402

Howes, Prof. G. B., dissection of Bats, 244

Huc, Pére, on Cat’s eyes, 148

Hume, A. O., on Pallas’s Sea Eagle, 336, 337
Hunting, Ancient, agreement, 68

Hursley Park, Hampshire, the deer-leap in, 66
Huth, F. H., Bibliography of the Horse, 138

Izis, glossy, 21

Im Thurn, Birds around Marlborough, 121
Indians, American, mode of killing ducks, 321
Ingram, James, of Rottingdean, 39

Inner Temple Hall in 1555, 316

Insects of Japan, 255

Instinct, inherited, 272

James I., his encouragement of field sports, 2
—— protection of the Kite, 405
Jameson’s Snipe, 290-291

Japanese Art, Nature studies in, 247-257
Jardine, Sir William, 31

Jerdon, on Leopard and Panther, 159
Jerfalcons, 1, 314, 405

—— of King John, 314

—— of James I., 405

Jesse, Gleanings in Natural History, 323
John, see King John

Kesie, Mr SERJEANT, inventory of his goods (1500), 315
Kensington Gardens, Bird-life in, 397-403

Kestrel, 1, 3, 18

—— mistaken for Cuckoo, 358

Kidd, Dr, on the anatomy of the Mole Cricket, 383
King, Capt. Philip, Voyage of the “ Adventure,” 340
Kingfisher, 210, 323, 328
INDEX 423

Kingfisher hovering, 329

—— in London, 402

-— — on the Broads, 210

King John, hawking Cranes with Jerfalcons, 314
Kingsley, Charles, on fishing Bats, 237-238

—— G. H., on Bats in Trinidad, 239

Kinloch, Col., Zaxge Game Shooting tn Thibet, 159
Kite, disappearance of the, 404-412

— — figured, 407

—— hawking, 406

—-— in London, 405

-—— in Sussex, 58

—— with frozen wings, 409, 410

Klein, Dr, on Grouse Disease, 98, 99

Knapp, Journal of a Naturalist, 409

—— on the Kite in Gloucestershire, 409, 410
Knot, 43, 45, 56

Knox, A. E., Game Birds and Wildfowl, 53

—— Ornithological Rambles in Sussex, 53, 58, 120

LABRUYERE, Les Ruses de Braconnage, 321
Lammergeier, or Bearded Vulture, 331, 341, 347
—— figured, 335

—— measurements and weight, 345

Land Dotterel, 58

Landmarks seen by birds, 273

Lapwings, 56

Larks, 13, 18

— — in London, 402

Latreille, on the Mole Cricket, 382

Laurence, G. N., on the European Woodcock in America, 287
Layard, E. L., Birds of South Africa, 347

—— on Swallows at sea, 265

Lees, Edwin, on Mistletoe, 393

-—_— Pictures of Nature around the Malvern Hills, 409
Leféburier, M., on the food of the Mole Cricket, 383
Leland, Collectanea, 314

Lennep, Dr., Bible Customs in Bible Lands, 349
Lenoirmont, Aximaux Domestiques, 170

Lenox, G. L., on the Viper sheltering its young, 370, 371
Leopard and Panther, 159

L’Estrange, Household Book (1519-1578), 315

Lewis, American Sportsman, 288

Light, the Fascination of, 320-329
424 INDEX

Lighthouses and birds, 258-277

—— in migration time, 261

Light-ships, 275

Lilford, the late Lord, 5

on March Cuckoos, 357

Little Plover, 43

Lizard, sheltering its young, 376

Long, Sir John, 315 ;

Lovat, Lord, on shed antlers, 79

—— on the age of deer, 82

Lover, Samuel, on St Patrick’s birthday, 388
Low, Fauna Orcadensis, 127

Lower, Contribution to Literature, 35, 40
—— Sussex Worthies, 38

Lubbock, Fauna of Norfolk, 211

 

MacpDonaLbD, D. G., on Grouse Disease, 98
Macky, Journey through England (1732), 34
Magpie in St James’s Park, 398

in Kensington Gardens, 398

Management of Hawks, 9

Mansell Pleydell, Birds of Dorsetshire, 121
—— on the Viper sheltering its young, 371-372
Mant, Bishop, on the Wheatear, 29

Manwood, Z7eatise of Forest Laws, 63

Marco Polo, on trained leopards, 171
Markham, Gervase, Cavelarie, or the English Horseman, 141, 142
—— Country Contentments, 141

—— Discourse of Horsemanshippe, 141

—— Faithful Farrier, 141

—— Hunting and Running Horses, 142

—— Maister Piece, 141

Markwick, William, Calendar of Nature, 267
—— Catalogue of Sussex Birds, 34

Marsh walk in May, 13

Marsham, Robert, Zvdications of Spring, 358
Marten, domesticated by the Greeks, 151
Matheson, Sir James, his Sea Eagle, 333
Maximilian, Prince Wied Neuwied, on the habits of Bats, 236
Maybird or Whimbrel, 24, 43

M‘Carthy, Prof., on Bats of Trinidad, 240, 241
Memory in Birds, 273

Merganser, 60

Merlin, 5, 7, 18

 
INDEX 425

Miall, Prof., on the Cat of the Greeks, 151
Middendorf, on the migration of birds, 268
Migrating birds, 262, 263

—— direction taken by, 270

Migration, 260-276

—— cause of, 270

-—— faculty by which performed, 270
—— probable origin of, 272

—w— records of, 268-269

Millais, J. G., on Blackgame, 109

—w— on the fertility of Blackgame, 111
—— on Cuckoo seen in March, 360
Mistletoe as food for birds, 392-396

—— trees on which it grows, 394

Moa of New Zealand, 330

Mole Cricket, the, 378-386

—— anatomy of, 383

—— eggs and young of, 381

—— figured, 380, 382

— — how to destroy, 384, 385

——- moulting, 381

—— natural enemies of, 485

—— ravages of, 384

—— sensitive to cold, 385

—— structure of, 379

Moles, 378, 385

Mollen, Adrian, falconer, 4

Moncrieffe, Sir Thomas, on the habits of deer, 81
Monson, Sir Thomas, Royal Falconer, 3
Montagu, Col., on a white Woodcock, 293
Moor, Mr, of Losely (1567), 317

Moore, on Devonshire birds, 122

—— on the Irish Shamrock, 390
Moorhens, 23

More, A. G., on the Red-legged Partridge, 118-119, 121
Morse, Prof., on Cuckoo Spit, 363

Muffett, Dr Thomas, Health's Improvement (1590), 317
Miiller, Favoernes Fuglefauna, 286

Nature studies in Japanese Art, 247-257

Needwood Forest, 70

Nelson, T. H., on Goldencrest carried by Owl, 351, 352
Newton, Prof., on early arrival of the Cuckoo, 360
—— on Dinornis maximus, 330
426 INDEX

Newton, Prof., on Kites in Lincolnshire, 408
—-— on the orthography of Mistle Thrush, 396
—-—~ on the migration of the Pied Wagtail, 54
—w— on the Steamer Duck, 341

Nicholson, G., Dictionary of Gardening, 366
Ni_ht-Heron, 324, 327

Nightingale, arrival of, 266, 354

Noctilio leporinus, dentition of, 244

—— foot of, 343

—— head of, 241

—— skull of, 245

North, Lord, Accounts (1577), 316
Northumberland Household Book (1512), 312, 316
Nuthatch in Kensington Gardens, 401

OLIVE or Oyster-catcher, 43, 56
Orford, Earl of, Kite-hawking, 406
Ormerod, E., Lxjurtous Insects, 383
Ortolan, French, 30

Osprey, 46, 58

Ostrich, 330

Ounce, or Snow Leopard, 159-160
Owen, Prof., on the Mole Cricket, 384
Oxbird, or Dunling, 43, 44, 56, 304
Oxer, George, falconer, 6
Oyster-catcher, or Olive, 43, 56

PacHam Harpour, past and present, 41-62
‘“‘ Pale dyke,” the meaning explained, 71
Palisot de Beauvais on the Rattlesnake, 374
Palmen, on the migration of birds, 269
Partridge, 10, 25

—— alleged enmity to common partridge, 128
—w— hawking, 8, ro

— —- Red-legged, in Scotland, 127

——- unknown in Ireland, 128

Peewit, 18, 26, 49, 203

Pegge, Form of Curey (1780), 313

Pells, John, falconer, 4

Pennant, Thomas, 31

Peregrine Falcon, 1, 6, 7

Petrels, 48

Phalarope, grey, 49, 53, 59
428 INDEX

Redwings, 392, 393, 395

Reed Bunting, 13, 15, 25, 205

——— migrating, 259

Reischek, H., on a breeding haunt of the Wandering Albatross, 343
Reptiles of Japan, 255

Rhea, 330

Ring Ouzel, 392

Ritzema Bos, Dr., Agricultural Zoology, 381, 384
Robinson, Sir W., Governor of Trinidad, 240
Rodd, E. H., Birds of Cornwall, 122

—— on the Kite in Devonshire, 410

Rolleston, Prof., on the Cat of the Greeks, I51
Rook-hawking, 6, 8

Rooks killing Mole Crickets, 385

Rose, A. S., on the Viper sheltering its young, 371
Rosel, on the Mole Cricket, 382

Roth, Prof., on small birds carried by Storks, 351
Rowley, G. Dawson, on a white Woodcock, 293
Royal, A., 89

Rozmital, Baron von, on the Kite in London in 1465, 405
Ruff and Reeve, 56, 209, 210

St Joun, CHARLES, on the habits of Blackgame, 102
Salmon-poaching, 321

‘ Saltories,” meaning of, explained, 64

Salvin, Francis Henry, falconer, 5

Osbert, on Swallows seen at sea, 265
Sanderling, 45

Sand Martins, 354

Sandpiper, Common, 18, 207

—— Green, 49, 208

—— Pectoral, 303

Sanford, W. A., measurements of Albatrosses, 343
Satchell, see Westwood

Saunders, Howard, on Swallows in Spain, 265
Saussure, on the Mole Cricket, 382

Scaup Ducks, 56, 60

Schneritz, Carl, on the weight of the Cape Bustard, 347
Scoters, 56

Scrope, Days of Deer Stalking, 78

Sea-Swallows, 46, 210

Seebohn, H., on Heligoland, 258

Selsea Bill, 41

Shamrock, the, 387-39!

 
INDEX 429

Sharp, D., on the Cercopida, 364

—— on Philenus spumarius, 364, 366

Sheep-dog trials, 178-184

—— Scotch Collie dog, 181

—-~— Old English Sheep-dog, 183

Sheep, Welsh, 180

Shell-turner or Turnstone, 43

Shirley, Znglish Deer Parks, 65, 69

Shirley Park, Derbyshire, deer-leap at, 72

Shortt, Dr J., on Preropus edulis, 245

Shot, a downhill, 91

Shovelard, or Spoonbill, eggs protected by law, 316
Shoveler, Duck, 211

Sidi Mohamed el Mangali, on the origin of the Cat, 154, 172
Simms, G. E., on C¢riciularia, 230

Skeat, Prof., on the derivation of Mistletoe, 396
Skuas, 48

Skylarks on migration, 259, 260

Sluice, the, 51

Smew, 60

Smith, Rev. A. C., on the Redleg in Wiltshire, 121
—— Cecil, Birds of Somersetshire, 133

Smollett’s Zravels through France and Italy, 29
Snakes sheltering their young, 369-377

—— Blowing Adder, 375

—— Copperhead, 375

—_— Garter, 375

—— Massasanga, 375

—— Moccasin, 375

— — Mountain Black, 375

—-- Rattlesnake, 375

Ribbon, 375

— — Water, 375

Snape, Andrew, Anatomy of the Horse (1683), 141
Snare for Wheatear, 36, 37

Snipe, 15, 18, 298-304

and their distinctions, 298-304

bill of, 304

difference between Snipe and Woodcock, 299
—— Great Snipe, 302

— — Jack Snipe, 303

Jameson’s Snipe, 290

—— mode of carrying young, 376

—— of Australia, 303

 

 

 

 

 
430 INDEX

Snipe of South America, 302

—— Pintail Snipe, 301

—— shooting, 305-311

—w— Summer, or Sandpiper, 18, 207
—— tail feathers of Common, 306
Soemmering, on the growth of Antlers, 76
Somersetshire, Deer-leaps in, 66
Southwell, Thomas, Fauna of Norfolk, 211
—— on Wildfowl Decoys, 221

—— on March Cuckoos, 357
Sparrow-hawk, 1, 2, 8, 354

—— mistaken for Cuckoo, 359
Spenser, Faerie Queene, 369
Spoonbill, 59, 210

Stag, an Exmoor, 81

Stalking in Argyllshire, 90, 91
Starling, Red-winged, 58

Starlings in Kensington Gardens, 401
—— killing Mole Crickets, 385
Stevenson, H.,. Birds of Norfolk, 211, 407
—— on the Kite in Norfolk, 407
—— on white Woodcocks, 294, 296
Stilt, Black-winged, 59

Stint, Little, 56

Stonechat, 25

Storms, effect of, on Birds, 274
Strant, or Godwit, 43, 44

Summer Migrants, 262

— — Snipe, 18, 207

Sussex, four good things of, 27, 50
Swallows, 354

—— in winter, 263-265

Swan-marks, 185, 195

Swan, laws relating to, 185, 199
—— mode of carrying young, 376
—— mode of marking, 193, 194
—— nest of, 189

—— newly-hatched Cygnets, 193
—— numbers on the Thames, 194
—_— of the City Companies, 191
—— on the Thames, 187

—— upping, 185-200

—— Wild, or Whooper, 53, 54
INDEX 431

Swan, Wild or Whooper, measurements and weight of, 341, 345
—— —— figured, 341
Syngamus trachealis, 367

 

Tassy, origin of the word, 153

Teal, 48, 6c, 208, 211

—— eggs protected, 316

Tern, Arctic, 56

Black, 56, 210

—— Common, 210

—— Lesser, 210

Terns, 46, 56

Thornton, Col., Kite-hawking, 406

Thrush, Mistletoe, 25, 392

— — Song, 392

Thrushes on migration, 260

Tickell, Col., on Preropus medius, 246

Tippoo Sahib’s trained Cheetas, 173

Tit, Bearded, 58, 207

Tits in Kensington Gardens, gor

Titterel or Whimbrel, 24, 43

Topsell, Historie of Foure-footed Beastes (1607), 142
Transmitted habits, 273

Tree Sparrow, figured, 254

Trinity House, Master of the, 275

Tristram, Canon, on Swallows in Palestine in December, 266
Turbervile, Booke of Hunting (1575), 141

Turner, Historia Avium (1548), 317, 318
Turnstone, 43, 49, 56

Turpin, M., on the food of the Mole Cricket, 384
Twici, Art of Hunting (1307), 141, 222

Upton, Nicouas, De Studio Militari, 224
Ussher and Warren, Birds of Ireland, 219, 356

 

VISION, power of, in birds, 272

Vole, short-tailed, 18

Von Tschudi, on Woctilio leporinus, 236

Vulture, Bearded, or Lammergeier, 331, 332, 333,
Cinereous, 332, 341

—— Griffon, 332, 334 341; 347

——_— measurements and weights, 345

Wacrtalt, Pied, 16, 53, 54
—— Yellow, 16, 17, 206

 
432 ENDEX

Wallace, A. R., on routes of migration, 270
Walsingham, Lord, on Partridges, 128

Walton, Izaak, 27, 369

—— on snakes sheltering their young, 369
Wanderers on migration, 274

Warbler, Reed, 21, 25, 204

—— Grasshopper, 206

—— Marsh, 206

—— Sedge, 205

Warner, Antiguitates Culinaria (1791), 313
Warren, Robert, see Ussher

Water-hens, 209

Water-rail, 209

Waxwing, 58

Weissmann, on routes of migration, 269-270
Westwood, Prof. J. O., Classification of Insects, 362, 364, 382
—— and Satchell, Bibliotheca Piscatoria, 226, 229
Wet day on the hill, 84-91

Wheatear, 27-40, 402

Wheatears in London, 402

—— mode of catching, 33

—— on the South Downs, 27-40

—— trap for, 33

Whinchat in Hyde Park, 402

Whimbrel, 24, 43

Whitaker, J., on varieties of the Woodcock, 297
White, Gilbert, Watural History of Selborne, 29, 31, 34, 121, 267
—— Kites on the Downs, 410, z

— — on Rooks with frozen wings, 410

—— on the Mole Cricket, 383, 384

—— on Woodcocks carrying their young, 377
White Woodcocks, 292, 297

Whitehead, J. G., on the arrival of the Cuckoo, 358
Whitethroat, 367

Whymper, Edward, on the Condor of the Andes, 338
Wideawakes, 43

Wigeon, 55, 60, 62, 211

Wild Cat, 162, 167

—— extinct in England, 165

—— formerly a beast of the chase, 164

-—— last in England, 167

—-— last in Lincolnshire, 168

—-— under the Welsh laws, 164

—— unknown in Ireland, 168
INDEX 433

Wild Ducks, 15, 59, 208, 211

—— mode of carrying young, 376

——— nest in Kensington Gardens, 399
Wild Fowl, an act to avoid the destruction of (1534), 316
—— French method of killing, 321

Wild life in the Highlands, 85

Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptians, 170
Willimot, Rev. W., falconer, 5

Willow Wren, 367

Willughby’s Oruzthology, 28, 33, 114, 318
Wilson, Dr Andrew, on Grouse Disease, 98
—— Squire of Eastbourne, 30

Winds favourable for migration, 274
Winter migrants, 262

Wolseley Park, Staffordshire, the deer-leap at, 65, 69, 70
Woodcock, mode of carrying young, 376, 377
Woodcocks, affected by wind, 279

—— a lost one, 281

— condition on arrival, 284

—— crossing the North Sea, 282

——. distinctions of sex, 285

—— in America, 286, 291

—— in London, 403

—— migration of, 278, 285

—— nest of, 283

—-- notable bags of, 283, 284

—— on the east coast, 280

—— pied and white, 292, 297

—--— the first flight of, 279

—-— two races of, 282

—— weight of, 284, 285

Woodpeckers in Kensington Gardens, 400, 401
Wood pigeons, 129, 137

—— catching in Les Landes, 130-136
—— migration of, 137

—-— netting in the Pyrenees, 129, 130
—— systematic capture of, 136

Wood sorrel, 389

Worrall, J. W., on Herons fishing, 326
Wright, C. A., on Swallows at Malta, 265
Wynkyn de Worde, 224, 225

YaRRELL, WILLIAM, at Eastbourne, 36

2E
BY THE SAME AUTHOR

The Birds of Middlesex. A contribution to the Natural
History of the county. 8vo. London, 1866.

 

A new Edition in preparation.

The Ornithology of Shakespeare. Critically examined, ex-
plained and illustrated. 8vo. London, 1871.

Hints on Shore-Shooting, with a chapter on skinning and
preserving birds. Post 8vo. London, 1871.

A Handbook of British Birds: showing the distribution of
the resident and migratory species, with an Index to the
records of the rarer visitants. 8vo. London, 1872.

A new and revised Edition with Coloured Plates. vo.
London, rgot.

Our Summer Migrants. An account of the migratory birds
which pass the summer in the British Islands. 8vo.
London, 1875.

A new Edition. Crown 8vo. London, 1876.

Rambles in Search of Shells. Land and Freshwater. With
Coloured Plates. Post 8vo. London, 1875.

White’s “Natural History of Selborne.” Edited with
Introduction and Notes. 8vo. London, 1875.

Second Edition. With ten Letters not included in any
previous Edition. 8vo. 1876.

Ostriches and Ostrich Farming. 8vo. London, 1876.

A new Edition. 1879.

British Animals extinct within Historic Times. 8vo.
and 4to: London, 1880o.

Glimpses of Bird Life. Portrayed with Pen and Pencil.
Coloured Plates. Folio. London, 1880.

Rodd’s Birds of Cornwall. Edited with an Introduction and
Memoir. 8vo. London, 1880.

Sketches of Bird Life: from twenty years’ observation of
their haunts and habits. S8vo. London, 1882:

 

 

 

 
BY THE SAME AUTHOR—Continued.
Essays on Sport and Natural History, with numerous
Illustrations. 8vo. London, 1883.

Catalogue of Books in the Library of the Department of
Zoology, British Museum. 8vo. London, 1884.

Hints on the Management of Hawks. 8vo. London,
1884.

 

Second Edition, revised, with numerous Additions and
Tllustrations. 8vo. London, 1898.

A Perfecte Booke for Kepinge of Sparhawkes and
Goshawkes. Written about 1575. Now first printed
from the original MS. on vellum. With Introduction and
Glossary. Sm. 4to. 1886.

Catalogue of Hunting Trophies in the American Exhibition
of 1887. Special edition with India proofs of the plates.
Sm. 4to. 1887.

Bert’s Treatise of Hawks and Hawking. For the first
time reprinted from the original of 1619. With an Intro-
duction. Sm. 4to. London, 1891.

Bibliothéca Accipitraria. A Catalogue of Books, Ancient
and Modern, relating to Falconry. With critical Notes,
Glossary and Vocabulary. 8vo. London, 1801 .

Walton’s Angler. Edited with Notes from a Naturalist’s
point of view. Tercentenary Edition. With plates on
Japanese vellum. 2 vols. 4to. London, 1893.

Evidence and Report of the Committee appointed by the
Board of Agriculture to inquire into the Plague of Field
Voles in Scotland. Folio. London, 1893.

The Rabbit. Volume VI. of Longmans’ Fur and Feather
series. 8vo. London, 1898.

 

Large paper Edition. 1898.

A Handbook of British Birds. New Edition, with Coloured
Plates. 8vo. London, rgot.
EDINBURGH
COLSTON AND CO. LIMITED
PRINTERS
iNDEX 4:

tO
sy

Pheasant, introduction of the, 113

—— and Blackgame, 102, 112

Phillips, E. C., Birds of Breconshire, 126
Pied Woodcocks, 292-297

Pigeons, domestic in London, 400

Pintail, 60

Pipit, Meadow, 17, 18

Rock, 58

Plover, Grey, 45, 55, 56

Golden, 49, 50, 55

—— Kentish, 59

Ringed, 24, 43, 56, 58

Plovers’ eggs, 19

Poaching salmon, 321-322

Pochard, 211

Pole trap, cruelty of the, 12

Polwhele, Astory of Cornwall, 123

Pool Snipe, zo

Poupart, M., on the nature of Cuckoo Spit, 361
Pringle, J. J., Zwenty Years’ Snipe-Shooting, 305
Prior, Popular Names of British Plants, 389
Ptarmigan, 86, 88

Pulteney, History of Dorsetshire, 121

Punts ashore, 47

Puss, origin of the word, 149

 

 

 

Rae, Dr Joun, on the birds of Hudson’s Bay Territories, 348, 349
Ranking, Wars and Sports of the Mongols and Romans, 171
Ranulphus Higden, Polychronicon, 314

Raven, 87

in Hyde Park, 390

Ray, John, Zxglish Proverbs, 27, 33

—— onthe Mole Cricket, 381

on the Shamrock, 388

Synopsis Avium, 318

Razorbill, 48

—— mode of carrying young, 376

Red-legged Partridge, distribution of, 113-128

—— figure of, 115

— — introduction of, 114

Redshank, 18, 19, 20, 26, 55, 56, 203

—— Dusky, 59

Redstart, 29

-—-— migration of, 259