which Mr. Atkinson seems to quarrel with, was used by me, because I did not find anything in Mr. Atkinson's previous statement that warranted me in believing he wished it to be understood, he actually had either seen, or shot, a moorhen while sub- merged and holding on by its feet to the weeds to keep itself down. The circumstance of Mr. Atkinson having seen weeds retained in the toes, after the bird had been shot in its concealment, (Zool. 498) might be a mere accidental circumstance, applicable to land-birds as well, who, in their last dying grasp often seize upon any substance which chances to be near them at that moment. But in the last (May) number, Mr. Atkinson states unequivocally the fact of his having seen and shot moorhens so submerged, and while holding themselves in that state by means of their feet. This, I confess, and the six reasons he begs me to consider, and his observations on decayed weeds sinking and remaining at the bottom, so as there to afford a hold to the moorhen's feet, sur- prises me not a little. Mr. Atkinson also stated (Zool. 498) "that no bird whatever indeed could put itself into this position and retain it independently of external assist- ance, and the feet are the instruments by which they are enabled to remain in the state of submergence," But how does this apply to the duck tribe and their feet when they are submerged ,"partially or wholly"? I fear too much valuable space in the 'Zoologist' has already been occupied in the discussion of this "trite subject" as Mr. Atkinson terms it, I am therefore desirous of terminating the dispute, and should not have alluded to it, had it not been forced upon me by Mr. Atkinson's last observa- tions. But I would wish to submit the following questions to the consideration of the three gentlemen, after named, whose opinions, as well-known naturalists and sportsmen, will, perhaps, set the point at rest. I would refer the questions to Mr. Yarrell, Mr. T.C. Eyton, and Sir W. Jardine, namely : Do the moorhen and other aquatic birds when alarmed, descend to the bottom of the water and there remain submerged and in a quiescent state ? and if so. Are the feet the instruments they use (by holding fast to weeds or flags) which enable them to keep the body in that state of submergence ? — W.H.S.; London, May 5th, 1846.
Ventriloquism in Birds. — There is, I think, a power possessed by many birds, to which, although sufficiently singular, I do not ever remember meeting with any allusion in any work, either on natural history or general topics ; I mean a power of producing effects similar or analogous to those produced by the ventriloquists. I suppose it must have happened to nearly all of us, perhaps many times in our lives, that hearing the note of some bird in a tree with tolerably thick foliage, we have found the sense of hearing insufficient to direct our eyes to the concealed minstrel ; I know that I have looked up till my neck ached, in the vain effort, more than once, and have been foiled at last. Sometimes the sound seemed to me to come from the summit of the extreme branch on the right ; sometimes from the midst of that on the left ; now from the highest twig ; and again, from the central shade. I was forcibly reminded of former neck-aching experiences one day in 1844, while walking along the Tweed : a narrow plantation skirted the river for some distance ; and while resting in the shade, I was attracted by the note of a magpie, just above my head, T wondered that the wary bird had suffered me to approach so near it, and very noiselessly I tried to discover the dis- tance of my chattering neighbour. The voice danced about like a Will-o'-the-wisp, — 'twas now here ; now there ; one moment in the top of a fir ; the next in the thick of an elm ! I strained my eyes and got a crick in the neck, but never a glimpse of him of the lustrous green and black and white. I believe I spent ten minutes in vainly seeking to detect him, and I determined at last, to ascertain whether or no 'twas a
