THE VIRGINIAN NIGHTINGALE.
Virginian Nightingale, Ray, Syn. Meth. Av. p. 85 (1713).
Red Bird, Catesby, N. H. Carol, i. pl. 38 (1731).
Red Grosbeak, or Virginia Nightingale, Albin, Birds, i. p. 55. pl. 57 male (1738) ; iii. p. 57. pl. 61. female (1740).
Loxia cardinalis, Linn. Amoen. Acad. iv. p. 242 (1749).
Coccothraustes indica cristata, Klein, Hist. Av. Prodr. p. 94 (1750).
Coccothraustes rubra, Cates, et Edw. Samml. Ausl. Vogel, i. Tab. LXXVI (1751).
Cardinal, Du Pratz, Gent. Mag. xxiii. p. 460 (1753).
Loxia cardinalis, Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 172 (1758).
Coccothraustes virginiana, Briss. Ornith, iii. p. 253 (1760).
Le Gros-bee de Virginie, ou lc Cardinal Hupe, Briss. Ornith. Suppl, vi. p. 88 (1760).
Coccothraustes Virginiana, Briss. Syn. Meth. i. p. 379 (1763).
Loxia eardinalis, Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 300 (1766).
Loxia rubra, Scop. Ann. i. p. 139 (1769).
Crested Grosbeak, Forster, Cat. Anim. N. Am. p. 11 (1771).
Red Bird (Kalm.), Forster, Trav. into N. Amer. ii. p. 71 (1771).
Loxia eardinalis, Gerini, Stor. Nat. Ucc. iii. pl. 329 (1771).
Le Cardinal Hupe, Buff. Hist. Nat. iii. p. 458 pl. xxviii (1775).
Lc Gros-bee de Virginie, Buff. Pl. Enl. 37 (1777).
Red Grosbeak, Albin, Song Birds, p. 84. pl. 84 (1779).
Cardinal Grosbeak, Lath. Gen. Syn. iii. p. 118 (1783).
Cardinal Grosbeak, Penn. Arct. Zool. ii. p. 349 (1785).
Cardinal Grosbeak, Lath. Gen. Syn. Suppl, i. p. 150 (1787).
Loxia cardinalis, Gmel. Syst. Nat. i. p. 847 (1788).
Cardinal, Browne, Nat. Hist. Jam. p. 647 (1789).
Loxia cardinalis, Lath. Ind. Orn. i. p. 375 (1790).
Loxia cardinalis, Shaw, Nat. Misc. iii. pl. 105 (1792).
Loxia cardinalis, Licht. Cat. Rer. Nat. Rar. p. 42 (1793).
Le Cardinal Huppe (Buff.), Sonn. Ois. xlvii. p. 23 pl. 103. f. 2 (1801). Virginian Nightingale, Renn. Mag. Nat. Hist. 1828, p. 418.
Cardinal Grosbeak, Lath. Gen. Hist. Birds, v. p. 274 (1822) ; Bechst. Cage and Ch.-Birds, p. 196 (1856) ; Wood Nat. Hist. Birds, p. 458 (1869).
Le Cardinal, Moine, Nat. Canad. i. 1869, pp. 225, 231.
Loxia cardinalis, Daub. Trait. d’Ornith. ii. p. 375 (1800) ; Wils. Amer. Orn. ii. p. 38 ph xi. fig. 1. 11 (1810) ; Shaw, Gen. Zool. ix. p. 248. pl. 46 (1815) ; (Cuv.), Griff. Aves. ii. p. 156 (1829) ; Stanl. P. Z. S. 1834, p. 81 ; Parker, P. Z. S. 1863, p. 516 ; Lamp. Zool. Gart. vi. 1865, pp. 228-9.
Coccothraustes cardinalis, Vieill. Nouv. Dict. siii. p. 526. pl. B. 30. f. 2 (1817) ; Vieill. Encycl. Meth. iii. p. 1001 (1823) ; Shaw, Gen. Zool. xiv. p. 87 (1824).
Coccothraustes virginianus, Russ, Stubenvogel, p. 524. taf. xiii (1879). Fringilla (Coccothraustes) cardinalis, Bonap. Obs. on Wils. Ornith. No. 79 (1825).
Fringilla cardinalis, Wils. et Bonap. Const. Misc. B. N. Amer. ii. p. 273 (1831) ; Nutt. Man. of Ornith. i. p. 519 (1832) ; And. Ornith. Biog. ii. p. 336 ; v. p. 514. pl. clix (1834) ; Sace, Zool. Gart. viii. 1867, pp. 440-1.
Cardinalis virginianus, Bonap. Sagg. Dist. Met. Anim. Vert. p. 53 (1831) ; Bonap. P. Z. S. 1837, p. 111 ; Bonap. Comp. List. B. Eur. et Am. p. 35 (1838) ; De Gregory, Rev. Zool. 1843, p. 127 ; Gr. et Mitch. Gen. Birds, ii. p. 358. pl. 88. fig. 4 (1844) ; Maund. Treas. Nat. Hist. p. 283 (1849) ; Blyth, Cat. B. Mus. As. Soc. App. p. viii (1849) ; Reichb. Av. Syst. Nat. pl. lsxix (1850); 'Bonap. Consp. Gen. Av. p. 501 (1850) ; Cab. Mus. Hein. i. p. 144 (1851) ; Gray, Gen. et Subgen. p. 72 (1855) ; Scl. P. Z. S. 1856, p. 302 ; Eyton, Cat. Birds, p. 266 (1856) ; Baird, B. N. Amer. p. 509 (1858) ; Scl. P. Z. S. 1859, pp. 365, 378 ; Scl. Ibis, 1859, p. 104 ; Scl. Cat. Amer. Birds, p, 100 (1862) ; Taylor, Ibis, 1862, p. 128 ; Dresser, Ibis, 1865, p. 491 ; Lawr. Ann. Lyc. N. Y. ix. 1868, p. 201 ; Scl. P. Z. S. 1869, p. 627 ; Gray Hand¬ List Birds, ii. p. 102 (1870) ; Jones, Am. Nat. v. 187], p. 176 ; Scl. et Salv. Nomen. Av. Neotr. p. 27 (1873) ; Baird, Brew, et Ridgw. H. N. Amer. B. ii. p. 100. pl. 30. figs. 6, 7 (1874) ; M’Cauley, Geol. Surv. U. S. iii. p. 666 (1877) ; Merr. P. U. S. Nat. Mus. 1878, p. 129, 132 ; Senn. Geol. Serv. U. S. iv. 1878, p 21 ; Jones, Forest and Stream, x. 1878, p. 275 ; M’Ches. Gibbs et Senn. Geol. Surv. U. S. v. pp. 78, 394, 487 (1879) ; Schmidt, P. Z. S. 1880, p. 313 ; Salv. Cat. Coll. Birds Strickl, p. 218 (1882) ; Salv. P. Z. S. 1883, p. 421 ; Bouc. P. Z. S. 1883, p. 444 ; Scl. List Vert. Z. S. Gard. p. 250 (1883) ; Salv. et Godm. Biol. Cent. Amer. Aves, p. 340 (1884).
Cardinalis carneus, Less. Rev. Zool. 1842, p. 209 ; Gray et Mitch. Gen.
Birds, ii. p. 358 (1844) ; Bonap. Consp. Gen. Av. p. 501 (1850). Cardinalis virginianus var. carneus, Lawr. Bull. Nat. Mus. iv. 1876, p. 20. Cardinalis lessoni, Bonap. Consp. Gen. Av. p. 501 (1850).
Cardinalis cardinalis, Licht. Nomencl. Avium. Mus. Zool. Berol, p. 44 (1854) ; Coues and Ridgw. Check-List N. Amer. Birds, p. 286 (1886).
Cardinalis var. coccincus, Baird et Ridgw. Hist. N. Amer. Bird, ii. p. 299 (1874) ; Merr. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus. 1878, pp. 129, 132. Cardinalis saturatus, Ridgw. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. iii. 1884-5. p. 24 ; Auk, ii. 1885, p. 295.
Pitylus cardinalis, In heraldry the Cardinal Grosbeak forms the crest to the arms of the family of Huger (South Carolina ; granted 1771).
“Arms. Ar. a human heart emitting flames, betw. two laurel branches fructed, saltireways, in chief, and an anchor erect, in base, all ppr. betw. two flaunches az. each charged with a fleur-de-lis or. Crest—a sprig, thereon a Virginia Nightingale, all ppr. Motto —Ubi libertas ibi patria.”And. Synopsis, p. 131 (1839) ; And. Birds Amer. iii. p. 198. pl. 203 (1841) ; Mart. Journ, fur Ornith. 1859, p. 214. Guiraca cardinalis, Trist., Jard. Contr. Orn. 1850, p. 5.
Figures. Albin’s Birds, pl. 57. et 61. Cates, et Edw. Vogel. pl. LXXVI. Gerini, Ucc. pl. 329. Buff. Ois. pl. xxviii. et Pl. Enl. 37. Shaw, Nat. Misc. pl. 105. Sonn. Ois. pl. 103. Wils. Ornith. pl. xi.
Shaw, Gen. Zool. pl. 46. Vieill. N. D. pl. B. 30. And. Biog. pl. clix. And. B. Am. pl. 203. Russ. Stubenv. taf. xiii.
English. Virginian or Virginia Nightingale. Cardinal. Red Gros¬beak. Crested Cardinal. Red-crested Grosbeak. Red Bird. Cardinal-bird. Cardinal Grosbeak. Cardinal Redbird. Crested Grosbeak. Virginia Grosbeak. Scarlet Grosbeak.
French. Le Cardinal. Le Gros-bec de Virginie. Le Cardinal Huppe. Le Cardinal rouge.
German. Cardinal. Kardinal. Der Rothvogel. Virginische Nachtigal.
Kardinalsvogel Der Cardinal Kernbeisser. Der rothe Kardinal.
Habitat. North America. From North Dakota and borders of Canada, South to Nicaragua in Central America, ranging from Newfoundland in the East to Colorado, New Mexico and Sonoro on the West Coast, including the Bermudas and Cozumel.
Male Adult. Crown, crest, cheeks and underparts vermilion red ; above brick red, with pale greyish margins to the feathers ; outer webs of primaries and tail-feathers bright brick red, inner webs darker, tips of same pale brown ; quills dark brown ; underside of wing for more than half its length, and-coverts pale vermilion red, tips pale brown ; a narrow frontal band, chin and throat black ; basal portion of all the body feathers dark slaty-grey : iris reddish brown ; bill red ; feet dark greyish brown : length 7.8, wing 3.4, tail 3.7, tars. 0.95, culm. 0.75.
Female. Above pale olive brown, paler on the forehead : crest, outer webs of primaries, great wing-coverts, centre portion of secondaries, tail-feathers and thighs brick-red ; secondaries and tail-feathers broadly edged with pale olive brown ; underside of wing and-coverts rosy red ; tips of primaries and tail very pale brown, quills dark brown ; cheeks, breast and sides pale buffish brown, paling towards the abdomen and under tail-coverts ; a narrow frontal band, chin and throat slaty-grey : iris reddish brown ; bill red ; feet pale brown : length 8.3, wing 3.6, tail 4.3, tars. 0.95, culm. 0.67.
Toung. Similar to female, but paler ; the tinges of brick-red on breast, wings and tail less defined.
Observations. From a series of twenty-six examples of both sexes, and different phases, from many localities, now before me, it is easy to recognise the gradation of forms, which have been described under the following names :—Cardinalis virginianus, C. var. coccineus, C. carneus, C. lessoni, C. var. saturatus, C. var. igneus and C. var. superbus.
Although these local forms are readily distinguished, it is my intention to unite the five former under the Eastern species C. virginianus, and the two latter under the North¬ western species C. igneus.
I am of opinion that a great deal more attention should be paid to the age, and especially the constitution of the wild bird, before an accurate estimate can be made of the extent to which it will vary.
To attempt to reproduce all that has been written on the vocal powers and habits of the Virginian Nightingale, would, I fear, lead to a vast amount of repetition, which it is my intention to avoid, by giving only the life history of this beautiful songster.
The Virginian Nightingale may be placed amongst the earliest cage-birds that ever left the shores of North America ; its brilliant plumage and Song combined, make it one of the most conspicuous objects throughout the swamp-and forest land of the Southern States. These two great qualities might have been the destruction of this much eulogized swamp-loving bird, had it not been for the vast territory which it occupies, for not only the natives but travellers to that country, do their utmost to procure it dead or alive. The skins were used ages ago by the natives like those of many other birds to adorn their head dresses and garments, for they, like the inhabitants of other parts of the world have great taste for showy colours, in this way the poor Virginian Nightingale has been a persecuted bird in its native haunts from the time of Columbus to the present day.
From a careful study of the localities in which this species has been obtained, and a calculation of the square miles, I find that the distribution from North to South and East to West covers about 3,698,000 or nearly 4,000,000 square miles, in this area, the bird becomes very variable in size and colour, the more southern forms being the smaller and richer coloured, while the northern are larger and paler.
Mr. Ridgway in a letter to me on the subject remarks, “you will observe that the difference between these two geographical races is most obvious in the females. Indeed this is the case with all the climatic or local forms into which the species is “split up,” Cardinalis cardinalis saturatus from Cozumel, having the capistrum quite black, exactly the opposite extreme from Cardinalis cardinalis igneus.” I may say the examples of Card. var. coccineus, from Yucatan and Southern Mexico most resemble the Cozumel bird, while those found in Bermuda are similar to the birds of the Alleghany Mountains.
The most north-western bird Cardinalis igneus (Baird), is undoubtedly the largest and most powerful billed bird of all the comparatively closely allied varieties ; therefore, I shall retain it as distinct, placing Mr. Ridgway’s very beautiful variety Cardinalis var. superbus with it, although the bill does not appear so robust as that of the former bird. I think the present bird in its wild state is an extraordinary illus¬tration of the Darwinian principle, variability of a single race, gradually developing into no less than six or seven remarkably well defined races, this and the Textors of Africa are worthy of further study on this point.
The name Virginian Nightingale was according to Willughby (who wrote his Ornithology 1676 and translated by John Ray in 1678) given to this songster by the earliest settlers in Virginia, the appellation Red-bird appears to be of equal antiquity, although little used. Dr. Latham in his ‘ General Synopsis,’ published in 1783, calls it the Cardinal Grosbeak and observes, “This species is met with in several parts of North America, and has attained the name of Nightingale deservedly, having a remarkably fine song not unlike that of the last named bird ; in spring, and part of the summer, it sits on the tops of the highest trees singing early in the morning, so loud as almost to pierce the ears ; is frequently kept in cages, in which it sometimes sings the year through, and the female is not greatly inferior to the male in respect of song.” And in his 'General History of Birds,' 1822, he continues, “It generally comes into New York and the Jerseys the beginning of April ; frequents the Magnolia Swamps during the summer, departing towards Carolina in autumn : although pretty numerous, it is not gregarious, rarely more than three or four being met with together : remains in Georgia and Pennsylvania the whole year.”
Alexander Wilson observes, “from the clearuess and variety of their notes, which both in a wild and domestic state, are very various and musical ; many of them resemble the high notes of a fife, and are nearly as loud. They are in song from March to September, beginning at the first appearance of dawn, and repeating a favourite stauza, or passage, twenty or thirty times successively ; sometimes, with little intermission for a whole morning together, which, like a good story too often repeated, becomes at length tiresome and insipid. But the sprightly figure, and gaudy plumage, of the Red-bird, his vivacity, strength of voice, and actual variety of note, and the little expense with which he is kept, will always make him a favourite. In Pennsylvania and the Northern States it is rather a scarce species ; but through the whole lower parts of the Southern States, in the neighbourhood of settlements, I found them much more numerous ; their clear and lively notes, in the months of January and February, being, at that time, almost the only music of the season. Along the roadsides and fences I found them hovering in half dozens together, associated with snow birds, and various kinds of sparrows.
“In the Northern States, they are migratory ; but in the lower parts of Pennsylvania, they reside during the whole year, frequenting the borders of creeks and rivulets, in sheltered hollows covered with holly, laurel, and other evergreens. They love also to reside in the vicinity of fields of Indian corn, a grain that constitutes their chief and favourite food. The seeds of apples, cherries, and many other sorts of fruit, are also eaten by them ; and they are accused of destroying bees.
“In the months of March and April, the males have many violent engagements for their favourite females. Early in May, in Pennsylvania, they begin to prepare their nest, which is very often fixed in a holly, cedar, or laurel bush.
“The few of our song birds that have visited Europe extort admiration from the best judges. “ The notes of the cardinal grosbeak,” says Latham, “are almost equal to those of the nightingale,” yet these notes, clear and excellent as they are, are far inferior to those of the wood thrush ; and even to those of the brown thrush or thrasher.”
According to Messrs. Baird and Ridgway, in their ‘History of North American Birds’ 1874, “In New England and the more Northern States it is chiefly known by its reputation as a cage-bird, both its bright plumage and its sweet song giving it a high value. It is a very rare and only an accidental visitor of Massachusetts, though a pair was once known to spend the summer and to rear its brood in the Botanical Gardens of Harvard College in Cambridge. A single specimen of this bird was obtained near Duenas, Guatemala, by Mr. Osbert Salvin.
“In its cage-life the cardinal soon becomes contented and tame, and will live many years in confinement.
“In Florida Mr. Audubon found these birds mated by the 8th of February. The nest is built in bushes, among briars, or in low trees, and in various situations, the middle of a field, near a fence, or in the interior of a thicket, and usually not far from running water. It has even been placed in the garden close to the planter’s house. It is loosely built of dry leaves and twigs, with a large propor¬tion of dry grasses and strips of the bark of grapevines. Within, it is finished and lined with finer stems of grasses wrought into a circular form. There are usually two, and in the more Southern States three, broods in a season.
“The eggs of this species are of an oblong-oval shape, with but little difference at either end. Their ground-color appears to be white, but is generally so thickly marked with spots of ashy-brown and faint lavender tints, as to permit but little of its ground to be seen. The eggs vary greatly in size, ranging from 1.10 inches to .98 of an inch in length and from .80 to .78 in breadth.”
Mr. H. E. Dresser says this species, is “Common throughout Texas during the summer and indeed almost all the year, ex¬cepting where Pyrrhuloxia sinuata is found. In such localities it is not so abundant as that bird. At Matamoras it is very common, and may be seen, caged, in almost every Mexican hut. I took quantities of the eggs of this species near San Antonio in April and May.”
In ‘Forest and Stream’ for May 1878, is a note on the “Northern¬most locality on record,” of the “Cardinal Grosbeak in Nova Scotia in winter." Mr. J. Matthew Jones writes —“Observing in your Natural History column, headed “A cardinal Grosbeak in Central Park,” stating that the writer had seen one of these birds in that locality on the 17th March, and expressing his surprise at the occurrence, I may mention that a pair of these birds were found in the spruce woods at Point Pleasant, near this city (Halifax, N. S.), on the last day of January, 1871.”
I am indebted to the Rev. Herbert D. Astley for the following details respecting the Virginian Nightingale breeding at liberty in England :—“ Even to those uninterested in the ways and habits of birds, the follow¬ing experiment must prove attractive. Experiment is hardly the word, for it was by an accident that a pair of Virginian Nightingales (Cardinalis Virginianus) made their escape from a large pheasantry, where they had been for two years, and had become inured to the many atmospheric changes of our climate ; not that they are ever delicate birds, for they make little of a November fog or a January snowstorm. However, they escaped on the 15th of May (1885), and as they kept about I did not take much trouble to get them in again, but put out their tin of canary seed so that they might not starve, and also as an extra inducement for them not to wander far from home. The pheasantry in which they had been confined is situated amongst bushes, and close by a rookery, which is all paled in, and adjoins the front garden lawns and a fairly large shrubbery, the home of many a bird ; rich in the growth of syringas, lilacs, box trees, and many other shrubs, amongst which spring up old elms, lime and firs. To this retreat, the Virginian Nightingales soon found their way, and the following morning after their escape, on going through the shrubbery, I saw the cock bird perched on the tip-top of a hawthorn. There he was, singing as loud and as fast as the notes would come, his beautiful scarlet breast looking more brilliant than usual in the full morning sun of a May day, whilst the intense green of the hawthorn showed up the bird in strong relief. I felt as I saw him, that it was a sight that few, if any, in England were enjoying at that moment, or indeed at any other time, for I have never before heard of these American cousins being allowed their full liberty. Two days after this, in a very bare yew shrub, for it was nothing more, I observed a nest commenced. Although I never imagined that the nightingales had already set to work, yet the nest struck me as being built of an uncommon material, and its general appearance convinced me that no blackbird, thrush, bullfinch, goldfinch, &c., had been at work. The nest was, a very frail one, with no founda¬tion ; merely bits of dead grass and some old pieces of rush lightly interwoven, the whole structure being decidedly small for the size of the bird ; in fact, a greenfinch would seem a more suitable occupant for it than its real owner.
“The shrub stands at a corner where four paths meet, and is therefore the most exposed position a bird could choose for such an object. The same day that I discovered the commencement of this nest, the gardener told me that he had actually seen the hen Virginian Nightingale on it, whilst the cock bird perched himself on the top of the shrub. Exactly a week after they had escaped, the first egg was laid ; it was rather larger than a sparrow’s in size, and dirty white in colour, with large blotches of reddish-brown, thicker at the round end than at the other. At present, all goes well ; and the hen has laid five eggs in as many consecutive days, and is now sitting. To protect such an exposed position, I have tied some branches of yew all over the bush, thereby making it difficult for passers- by to see the bird on her nest. As soon as the young are hatched, I intend rearing them up when a week old, and I look forward to seeing the old birds go to nest again before the summer is over. In the meanwhile, the subject is so interesting, not to say exciting, that the future fate of the young nightingales shall be related at a date not far distant, so here I must cease from “counting my chickens before they are hatched.”
“Since writing my last letter on this subject, four young birds have successfully hatched, the fifth egg being unfertile. They are now a week old, and are most carefully attended to by the parents ; but I intend taking them, for by rearing them by hand they will become much tamer, whilst the old birds will soon build again, and I look forward to seeing another brood in about a month’s time. The cock bird has almost entirely ceased singing since the young were hatched, and his state of alarm is great if anyone passes near the nest. The eggs took exactly a fortnight to hatch.
The brood of young Virginians mentioned above soon came to grief, a bird or a beast of some kind, it is not known what, but jays were the suspected culprits, made off with a couple, the two remaining birds I tried to rear by hand, but they seemed unable to digest the food and to my grief, died. The old couple at once began hunting for another nesting place and fixed upon one quite close to the former site, but this time in a low box bush, the nest was quickly finished and four eggs deposited in it, strict injunctions being given to the gardeners not to disturb it in any way, and in order to try and guard against robbery from mice or squirrels, I tarred the stem of the bush as far as I could and also placed some more branches of box upon the thinner parts at the top, so as to hide the eggs from prying eyes of unfriendly feathered fowl. But no ! after the hen bird had sat out more than half her time, the eggs disappeared, and—disappointment No. 2.
“The Virginian Nightingales themselves seemed to lose less heart than I did, for they actually commenced another nest the day after they had lost their second hope of a brood, and, experientia docens, they built their third nest in a holly tree of a somewhat weeping growth, placing it in the under side of an overhanging branch about 9ft. from the ground. Four eggs were again laid and hatched on the 5th of August of the same year (18S5) in which they had escaped : but when the young birds which grew apace were about a week old, once more two disappeared, evidently taken by a jay or a squirrel, for the nest was rather demolished, so in despair the other two were carried into the shelter of the house. One was considerably larger than the other, audit was this one that succumbed in a day or two, either to injuries or indigestion ; the other bird, an ugly uncouth little creature was fed upon sopped bread and plenty of fruit—strawberries, grapes, etc. :—
“He throve, and he turned out luckily to be a male bird. I have him now (1888) in his splendid scarlet plumage, insolently tame, and a delightful pet. He attained his red coat in the late autumn to a great degree, though perhaps owing to the vicissitudes of his early life, not nearly so bright in colour as he became in his second year. To any stranger approaching his cage with friendliness, he will put up his crest and sing himself hoarse, and if allowed to come out, he will fly to one’s shoulder and with grotesque movements shout into one’s ear, whereby he evidently thinks one is troubled with a loss in the sense of hearing. I must add, that the parent birds after having been decoyed back again into the pheasantry, were once more released in the following spring, much to their delight. They built again, but the hen bird, after laying two eggs, was found dead.”
The number of instances of its breeding in aviaries are but few. Lord Stanley had a pair which reared three young ones in his menagerie at Knowsley in 1834. Dr. Sclater records it as having bred in the Zoological Society’s Gardens, and in various private aviaries they often build and lay eggs, which generally come to grief.
In confinement I recommend millet, canary, buckwheat, rape, turnip- seed, wheat and Indian- corn to be given ; and when obtainable in a green or soft condition, at intervals, also hawthorn berries ; hempseed should be very sparingly used.
Much valuable information can be gathered from Dr. Karl Russ’s ‘ Stubenvogel,’ and Dr. A. E. Brehm’s ‘Thierleben,’ on this bird in captivity.
No. Sex. Mus. Locality. Length. Wing. Tail. Tars. Culm.
a Male E. B. Miami, N. America. 7.8 3.4 3.7 0.95 0.75
b Female E. B. N. America. 8.3 3.6 4.3 0.95 0.67
c Male E. B. Wilson Co. N. America. 8.45 3.7 4 0.95 0.7
d Male E. B. Virginia, N. America (D. W. Scott) 7.95 3.65 3.9 0.95 0.67
e Male E. B. Alabama, N. America (Kumlien and Bean) 7.1 3.55 3.85 0.9 0.7
f Male E. B. Tamaulipas, Mexico 8 3.5 3.9 0.9 0.62
g Male E. B. Mexico 8.7 3.55 4.15 0.97 0.73
h Male jun. E. B. Mexico 8.4 3.65 4.15 0.95 0.65
i Female E. B. N. America. 7.5 3.35 3.75 0.95 0.65
j Male E. B. Yucatan, Mexico. 7.55 3.3 3.85 0.95 0.7
k Male E. B. Yucatan, Mexico. 8.2 3.3 3.95 0.9 0.7
l Male jun. E. B. Yucatan, Mexico. 7.65 3.15 3.65 0.85 0.7
m Female E. B. Merida, Yucatan. 7.6 3.25 3.75 0.95 0.7
1 Male M. M. Bermuda 8 3.6 4 0.95 0.7
2 Male M. M. Bermuda 8 3.45 4 0.95 0.7
3 Male M. M. Bermuda 7.8 3.45 3.9 0.95 0.7