that had built and utilized the nest in the adjoining tree. I took four of the nine eggs away, and the old bird incubated the remainder, and in the course of time brought forth a second brood. Meanwhile the other Mistle-Thrush had constructed a second nest a short distance off, and she too was successful in hatching out a second brood. I should add that the eggs in the two nests in the first instance presented very distinctive features, so the absolute accuracy of what I have related need not for one moment be called in question. The Curator of the Leicester Museum and others were acquainted with this interesting case at the time.
The year following (1884) only one nest was built; I found it on March 24th, some six weeks earlier than in 1883, when the two nests had been built in May, altogether a late date, except on the hypothesis that it was a case of second nesting, which seems probable. The nest was placed in pretty much the same spot in 1884; it contained seven eggs, all fresh, and an old bird was brooding them when I discovered it. Of the seven eggs, four were of one size, shape, and colouring, and three of another, and both lots corresponded with the character and were beyond all doubt referable to the two types of the eggs laid in the preceding year. It maybe hazardous to theorize on the subject, but I have a theory, and it is this—that the two hen birds shared a mate between them. In the one instance the eggs were small and round, while in the other they were rather elongated, the ground colour, moreover, as also the markings, varying with each type. Having kept specimens of each in 1883, I naturally compared them with those laid in 1884, and there can be no sort of doubt but that they were the produce of the same two birds.
With regard to this species, I do not remember having met with anything else in their economy or life-history that need be reproduced here. Their conspicuous nests, built early in the spring of the year, and containing, as a rule, four or five eggs, are known to most schoolboys; but when I come to deal with the Lapwing, I shall relate what I have every reason for believing was a second instance of a single male bird aiding and abetting the nidification of two females. Polygamy is natural to some species, but Mistle-Thrushes and Lapwings do not come within the category. Of course, I am far from contending that the accuracy
