White's Thrush

Turdidae

May 5

Zoothera aurea (Holandre, 1825) (24, 2)

Photo © By Cory, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=779073

STATUS

Palearctic. Polytypic.

OVERVIEW

All records since 1940 as per BOU (1971). Prior to this date the BOU stated about 30, mainly October-January, but one in 'spring', one in May, and one in September: Cornwall, Devon (2), somerset, Gloucs., (2), Hants., Sussex, Suffolk (2), Norfolk, Warks., Salop, Cheshire, Yorks., (5), Durham (3), Berwick, Perth, Aberdenn, Fair Isle (4) all before 1970.

My differences to this are of two sight records, one in 1870 Yorkshire, the other in Co. Durham 1872 and the 1881 Suffolk record that I find unacceptable, reasons below. Records to add to the BOU list are Avon (1871) Isles of Scilly (1886) , Essex (1894) and Northumberland (1914).

RECORDS

1). 1828 Dorset Heron Court, Christchurch, Hampshire, male, shot, 24th January, now at the Bournemouth Natural Science Society Museum.

(J. Curtis, Transactions of the Linnean Society 17: 555; Eyton, 1836; Yarrell, 1845; Newman, 1866; Yarrell, 1871-85; E. Newman, Zoologist 1874: 4047; M. A. Mathew, Zoologist 1894: 345; Kelsall & Munn, 1905; Witherby, 1920-24; W. P. C. Tenison, Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club 67: 49; Clark, 2022).

History J. Curtis (1832) in the Transactions of the Linnean Society, Vol. XVII. p. 555, from the extracts of the minute book read on 4th December, 1832, read an account of a species of Thrush killed at Heron Court, Hants, in January 1828, by the Hon. Charles A. Harris, communicated by J. Curtis, Esq., F.L.S. Mr. Yarrell, in a letter accompanying the communication, considered the bird to be identical with the Turdus varius of Horsfield, a native of the Indian Islands and New Holland. 'The specimen shot was in perfect plumage, and had no appearance of ever having been in confinement. Mr. Yarrell is disposed to think the species may also be a native of Africa, which if confirmed would account for its appearance in England.'

Eyton (1836: 92-93) says: 'We are indebted to the Earl of Malmesbury for being able to insert a cut of the above bird in our work. His specimen is the only one obtained, that we are aware of, in the British Isles, and was originally supposed to be identical with Turdus varius, described and figured by Dr. Horsfield's Zoological Researches in Java.

It was killed, Lord Malmesbury informs us, by him, on the 24th of January, 1828. It attracted his attention, on disturbing it, in passing through a plantation, where it appeared to have established its haunt in a high furze brake, as it returned repeatedly before he could succeed in shooting it. Its flight was undulating, similar to that of a Mistle Thrush, of which, when he first saw it on the wing, he thought it a variety

It is a female, was solitary, and notwithstanding the season of the year, was plump and heavy....Mr. Yarrell, compared a drawing of ours, copied from a beautiful one by Mr. John Curtis, and a description of Lord Malmesbury's bird, with the specimens above mentioned, and found them to coincide. Lord Malmesbury's bird was killed near Heron Court, his Lordship's seat in Hampshire; on which account we have ventured to propose the specific appellation of Whitei, in memory of one with whom every body is familiar by name, the late Gilbert White, author of White's Natural History of Selborne.'

Yarrell (1845 (1): 192-195, 2nd ed.) says: 'By the kind permission of the Earl of Malmesbury, I am enabled to give a figure from that extremely beautiful thrush which was shot by his Lordship himself on his estate at Heron Court, near Christchurch, in January 1828; and his Lordship has very kindly allowed me the free use of this specimen, to make a close examination of it, and by taking measurements of the various parts of the bird, to institute a comparison between it and two others which have been brought to this country from the East, one of them found in Japan, the other in Java; specimens of the first of which are in the Museum of the Zoological Society, and of the second in the Museum of the Honourable East India Company. His Lordship's example was identical to the example from Japan apart from a shorter bill....It was shot on 24th January and proved to be a male.'

Alfred Newton (1871-74 (1): 257, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, adds: 'Lord Malmesbury's bird measures twelve inches and a half, the wing from the carpal joint to the end of the longest primary, six inches and three eighths; the second and fourth primaries equal in length; the third the longest in the wing.'

Edward Newman (1874) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IX. p. 4047, in a review of the species, admits this record.

Murray A. Mathew of Buckland Dinham, Frome (1894) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XVIII. p. 345, says: 'I lately had the privilege of visiting the collection of stuffed birds at Heron Court, in company with Mr. Edward Hart, of Christchurch.

The collection was formed by the late Earl of Malmesbury, and all the birds were secured on this interesting and beautiful estate. The first "British" specimen of White's Thrush is still in very good condition, and is mounted with one wing raised, exactly as it is represented in the well-known engraving in Yarrell's British Birds.'

Kelsall & Munn (1905: 5-6) say: 'It was believed by Eyton to be a new species, and was named by him after Gilbert White....The figures in Eyton's Rarer British Birds, in Yarrell's British Birds, and in Saunder's Manual of British Birds, are taken from the Earl of Malmesbury's specimen.'

W. P. C. Tenison, Editor (1947) in the Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club, Vol. LXVII. p. 49, at the 464th Meeting of the Club held on 15th January 1947 at the Rembrandt Hotel, London, says: 'Mrs. H. W. Boyd Watt exhibited a specimen of White's Thrush, Turdus dauma aureus, which is the first British record, having been shot by Lord Malmesbury near Christchurch, Hampshire, on January 24, 1828.'

2). 1859 Gloucestershire/Warwickshire Welford, Gloucestershire, 6th to 26th January when killed.

(R. F. Tomes, Ibis 1859: 379-389; Lord Clifton, Zoologist 1872: 2942; Yarrell, 1871-85; E. Newman, Zoologist 1874: 4049; Norris, 1947; Swaine, 1982; Harrison et al., 1982; Harrison & Harrison, 2005).

History R. F. Tomes (1859) in The Ibis, Vol. I. pp. 379-389, says: 'The opportunity of examining a recently-killed specimen of the Turdus aureus of M. Hollandre [sic] (T. whitei of Yarrell's British Birds), occurs so rarely, that on the receipt of a recently shot specimen, I thought it desirable to make an examination of it at once, before it had undergone mutilation of any of its parts in the process of preservation.

Afterwards I examined with care the digestive organs, and the form and proportion of its sternum and other bones. The record of these peculiarities, with the addition of some remarks which I am able to give relative to its habits, will, I believe, render the following description more complete than any one which has yet appeared. When examining the osteology, I had occasion to make a comparative use of the skeleton of some other of our British Thrushes, and shall take the present opportunity of adding a few comments on the value of some of the divisions into which the genus Turdus has been divided.

I may commence by stating that the village of Welford, five miles west of Stratford-on-Avon, where the specimen was obtained, is situated in a bend of the Avon, and that the soil is a rich alluvium. Its position is highly favourable for the growth of timber and fruit trees; and it is well shrouded in orchards and small enclosures, fringed with their hedge-rows and ivied elms, affording a favourite haunt for many of the smaller birds, with a good supply of cherries and other fruits in the summer months, and of berries through the autumn and winter seasons.

From a cherry orchard, a few miles down stream, I obtained, a few years since, a specimen of the Rose-coloured Pastor; and Starlings and Thrushes abound. Of insect-feeders there is an equally good supply; and I have had more than one opportunity of inspecting the nesting of the lesser Spotted Woodpecker.

In a small grass enclosure immediately adjoining the village, and thickly surrounded by elms, a friend of mine observed a bird rise from a dry leafy ditch, which at the first glance was mistaken for a Woodcock, but soon recognized as one of the Thrush kind. This happened on the 6th of January; and on hearing the account, I stimulated further search, but without effect until the 23rd of that month, when the bird was again flushed from the same enclosure, and, as before, from the bottom of a dry ditch amongst dead leaves. Again on the 26th it rose from the same ditch, and within a few yards of the same spot.

On each occasion it was busied in turning over the dead leaves, from beneath which it appears to have taken its food. Although Blackbirds, Thrushes, and Missel Thrushes were abundant and seen at the same time feeding on the ivy and hawthorn berries, the present bird was always observed to resort only to the trees or hedges when disturbed, and then merely as a place of rest, remaining for some time perched in an upright position in one spot, without noticing the berries or the species feeding on them. Its flight when roused from its feeding was very undulating, like that of the Green Woodpecker, and low, often settling on the ground, and only making choice of a tree when it happened to pass under one, into which it rose almost vertically. As far as its habits could be ascertained from these short opportunities of observation, it would appear to be almost entirely a ground feeder.

Mr. Blyth says: of the allied Indian species, Oreocincia dauma, that it is generally met with amongst bamboos, in which situation the ground would very likely be the attraction, rather than the canes. I have been thus particular in the description of the locality in which the bird appeared, on account of the interval which occurred between its first and second appearance; for it must be supposed that it was a suitable one, or it would nut have again returned to it after an absence of more than a fortnight.

An examination of the specimen when obtained gave the following results. The tail-feathers are fourteen in number; the two central ones the shortest, the next pair of nearly equal length with the outer pair, and the remaining ones, viz. four on each side, nearly equal in length and the longest. The outer one has its root dusky, more extended on the inner than on the outer web: middle part greyish, tinged with yellow ; the tip white, less distinct on the outer than on the inner web. Second feather similar but darker, and less grey, with the dusky part almost black, and reaching to two-thirds of its length. Third one with the dark part extended almost to the white tip, leaving only a small space of yellow-brown on the outer web, but having some of that colour at the root on that web. Fourth with the same patch of yellowish at the base, but reaching for more than half its length ; whilst that which was reduced to a small space on the third near its tip, is in this one quite lost. Fifth, similar to the fourth, but the yellow-brown extended to fully three-fourths of its length. Six and seventh wholly yellow-brown, faintly barred on both webs with darker brown. All the white tips decreasing in size from the outer to the inner feathers, on which they are almost obsolete. First quill short and rudimentary. Of those which really compose the end of the wing, the first and fourth are nearly equal, and the second and third also nearly equal in length and the longest in the wing - longer by four or five lines than the first and fourth. The wing, in its structure, does not differ much from that of the Fieldfare, Song-thrush, Ring-ousel, or Missel Thrush, the relative length of the quills being pretty similar. Closed wings with their ends extending to within two inches of the end of the tail. Irides very dark brown, almost black. Upper mandible uniform dark brown; lower one similar, but yellowish towards and at the base. Legs and feet pale yellowish-brown; claws the same, but paler. Weight 93.33 drachms.'

Alfred Newton (1871-74 (1): 252, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, adds: 'Between the 6th and 26th of January, 1859, a White's Thrush was several times observed at Welford, near Stratford-on-Avon, and, having been killed, is now in the collection of Mr. Robert Tomes of that place, who, unlike most ornithologists, was not content with merely announcing the bare fact, but in doing so (Ibis, 1859, p. 379) contributed some excellent remarks on the structure and affinities of the species, while he has further laid the present Editor under an obligation by submitting the specimen to him for examination.'

Edward Newman (1874) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IX. p. 4049, in a review of the species admits this record.

Norris (1947: 27) says: 'The first record is of one seen on the 6th and 23rd January, then killed on the 26th January near Welford. The locality was originally an island in Gloucestershire which was gained by Warwickshire in 1930.'

3). 1870 Somerset Hestercombe, near Taunton, shot, about 5th January.

(W. Bidgood, Field 29th Jan., 1870: 103; Cecil Smith, Zoologist 1870: 2018; Field 2nd Mar., 1872: 184; Cecil Smith, Zoologist 1872: 2941; E. Newman, Zoologist 1874: 4049; Somerset Ornithological Society, 1988).

History William Bidgood of the Museum, Taunton (1870) in The Field of 29th Jan., Vol. XXXV. p. 103, says: 'A specimen of White's Thrush (Turdus whitei) was shot at Hestercombe, near here, on the 7th inst., by Mr. J. Beadon, of Gotten House. The species, I believe, inhabits Japan, and has been rarely met with in the British Isles, or even in Europe, the present specimen making, so far as I know, the fourth recorded instance of its occurrence in Britain. This bird is somewhat larger than the common Mistle Thrush, which it much resembles on the breast and under parts. Here, however, the resemblance ceases, the head, wings, and upper surface being beautifully painted. The prevailing colour is olive-green, varied with black, and the feathers tipped with a rich buff, forming on the wing two conspicuous lines. The bird has been presented to Mr. Cecil Smith, of Lydeard House, for his collection.'

[Our correspondent "Zoophilus" remarks: "The proper name of this thrush is Turdus varius of Pallas (not of Horsfield). It was subsequently named F. aureus by Hollandre [sic], and T. whitei by Mr. Eyton. Its proper habitat is in the north-eastern countries of Asia, and it has several nearly similar congeners, from all but one of which it differs in the remarkable particular of having fourteen tail-feathers". - Eds.]

Cecil Smith of Taunton (1870) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. V. p. 2018, undated, says: 'I have to record the occurrence of this very rare Turdus whitei of Yarrell at Hestercombe, near Taunton. On Friday, the 7th of January, I met Mr. Beadon, of Yatton, when out hunting: he told me his son had shot a bird he did not know, when out shooting a day or two before at Hestercombe, in mistake for a Woodcock. Mr. Beadon afterwards kindly sent me the bird, or rather what remained of it (for it had been very much mauled by dogs and beaters), for identification, and with permission to keep it for my collection if I could make anything of it, which luckily, with the assistance of Mr. Bidgood, the Curator of the Museum at Taunton, I have been able to do so.

The bird agreed so closely with Yarrell's description that I need add no particulars, except that the legs and toes (scarcely faded at all when I first saw them) were yellowish brown instead of pale brown; the claws considerably paler than the legs and toes, but still tinged with yellowish brown.'

Cecil Smith (1872) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VII. p. 2941, adds: 'I see, in an editorial remark to Mr. Gurney's note on White's Thrush, in your January number (Zool., s.s. 2913), you discredit the reports of the occurrences of this bird, on the authority of a correspondent whose name you do not mention.

As two of these occurrences were recorded by me, perhaps you will allow me to say: a few words on the subject: the first, recorded in The Zoologist for 1870, as having been killed near Taunton by Mr. Beadon, was brought to me in the flesh by Mr. Beadon himself on the 7th of January, a time of year at which the Missel Thrush has lost the early plumage, in which alone it could by any possibility be confounded with White's Thrush; moreover, besides myself and our Vicar, the Rev. M. A. Mathew (who both feel ourselves perfectly competent to distinguish a White's Thrush from a Missel Thrush), several of your best known correspondents have seen this bird - both the Mr. Gurneys, Mr. Harting and Mr. Gatcombe: we could scarcely all six have passed a young Missel Thrush as a White's Thrush.

As for the other, recorded by me in The Zoologist for 1871, I did not see it in the flesh, but when I did see it I looked carefully at it before I recorded it, as I wished to convince myself that it was not set up from a foreign skin; but I now entertain no doubt on that subject, not only from the appearance of the bird itself, but also from other evidence I have been able to collect concerning it.

Both Mr. Mathew and Mr. Bidgood, the curator of the Museum at Taunton, a good practical birdstuffer, who saw it at the time that I did, quite agree with me that the bird was set up from a freshly-killed specimen.

This bird was subsequently sold to Mr. Bine, of Bishop's Hall, in whose collection Mr. Gatcombe saw it, and was so pleased with it that he took it to London to show to his ornithological friends there, who would undoubtedly have discovered the mistake had there been one. I am perfectly aware that in your Montagu's Dictionary you say: that this bird has no claim to a place in the British list, but since that time several occurrences in various parts of the British Isles have been recorded in The Zoologist: one of them, quoted from The Field, is probably doubtful, as the bird was not obtained; but of the others there can, it seems, be no reasonable doubt.

This increase in the number of occurrences would seem to show either that up to that time the bird must have been overlooked, which is by no means improbable (my bird would have been given to the ferrets the next day had I not happened to meet Mr. Beadon out hunting), or that the species is extending its geographical range to the westward, as the Missel Thrush is said to be doing to the northward in Scotland, in which case it would be interesting to know if more frequent occurrences than hitherto have been observed in other parts of Europe within the last few years.'

Alfred Newton (1871-74 (1): 252, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, adds: 'Early in January, 1870, one was shot at Hestercombe near Taunton, and obtained by Mr. Cecil Smith (Zool., s.s. p. 2060) who has kindly forwarded it for use of this work.'

Edward Newman (1874) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IX. p. 4049, in a review of the species admits this record.

Locally, Palmer & Ballance (1968) accepted this as did the Somerset Ornithological Society (1988).

4). 1871 Avon Langford, Somerset, shot, 6th January.

(C. Smith, Zoologist 1871: 2607; H. Byne, Field 6th May 1871: 359; Yarrell, 1871-85; J. H. Gurney, Zoologist 1872: 2912-13; C. Smith, Zoologist 1872: 2941; E. Newman, Zoologist 1874: 4049; M. A. Mathew, Proceedings of the Somerset Archaeological & Natural History Society 39: 106; Palmer & Ballance, 1968).

History Cecil Smith of Taunton (1871) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VI. p. 2607, dated 20th April, 1871, says: 'A second specimen of this wanderer from the Far East was killed in this county on the 6th of January of this year, at Langsford, near the Mendip Hills: it was in open ground, but near a wood, feeding on hawthorn berries, at the time it was shot. I had heard rumours of this bird for some time, but did not like to record it until I had satisfied myself, not only that it was the bird, but also that it was not a foreign skin made up for sale. I had, however, an opportunity of examining it on Saturday, and am quite satisfied on both points. It in every respect resembles the bird killed near Taunton in January, 1870, and recorded by me in The Zoologist for that year (s.s. 2018).'

Henry Byne of Milligan Hall, Bishop's Hull, Taunton (1871) in The Field of 6th May, Vol. XXXVII. p. 359, says: 'I have the pleasure to bring to your notice a second specimen of White's Thrush shot in the county of Somerset, at Langsford, on the Mendip Hills, Jan. 7 last, by a young man who was Blackbird shooting. The thrush was feeding on the haw berry. It is in splendid plumage, and in perfect condition, and has been added to my collection of British birds. Mr. Cecil Smith (author of the Birds of Somersetshire, and owner of the fist specimen of White's Thrush shot at Hester Combe in this county), recorded my specimen in The Zoologist a few days ago.'

[In confirmation of Mr. Byne's report, we have received the following important particulars from the Rev. M. A. Mathews, of Bishop's Lydeard: 'There is not the slightest reason to doubt the genuineness of this specimen. When I saw it the tongue was still in, and the legs soft and flesh-coloured. It is the Japan bird, with fourteen tail-feathers.' - Eds.]

J. H. Gurney (1872) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VII. pp. 2912-13, dated November 1871, says: 'It is a curious coincidence that two specimens of this rare thrush have been this year (1871) recorded in The Zoologist as occurring on successive days; the first seen in Kent by Lord Clifton on 5th January; the other killed on the 6th of January at Langsford, in Somersetshire, as noted by Mr. Cecil Smith, and I take the liberty of calling attention to this interesting approximation of dates.'

[A correspondent for whose judgement I have the highest respect discredits the statements about the occurrence of White's Thrush: he says: that Missel Thrushes, birds of the year, have the appearance of belonging to the rarer species. I trust ornithologists will look carefully at specimens, with a view to ascertaining whether this is the case, before they announce the occurrence of this bird. - E. Newman.]

Cecil Smith (1872) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VII. p. 2941, replies: 'I see, in an editorial remark to Mr. Gurney's note on White's Thrush, in your January number (Zool., s.s. 2913), you discredit the reports of the occurrences of this bird, on the authority of a correspondent whose name you do not mention.

Alfred Newton (1871-74 (1): 252, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, adds: '...almost exactly a year later, on the 6th of January, 1871, the occurrence, at Langsford, near the Mendip Hills, of a second Somersetshire specimen was recorded (Zool., s.s. p. 2142) by the same gentleman - this last being now in the possession of Mr. Byne, of Miligen Hall, near Taunton, who has sent its photograph to the Editor.'

Edward Newman (Zoologist 1874: 4049) in a review of the species admits this record.

M. A. Mathew (1893) in the Proceedings of the Somerset Archaeological & Natural History Society, Vol. XXXIX. p. 106 says: '...the other, also in January, in 1871, at Langford, on the northern slope of the Mendip.'

Locally, Palmer & Ballance (1968) accepted the record but twenty years later the Somerset Ornithological Society (1988) did not record it or pass comment [because it is now in Avon], while, Ballance (2006: 264) lists only one record for Somerset, the one in 1870, at Hestercombe.

Comment Professor Newton in a letter to Andrew Brotherston, Kelso, listed this as acceptable in 1879. Mr. Byne bought the now rejected 1869 Devon Calandra Lark off Truscott the Exeter birdstuffer. Langford is now in Avon or North Somerset.

5). 1871 Norfolk Hickling Broad, male, shot, 10th October, now at Castle Museum, Norwich.

(T. E. Gunn, Zoologist 1871: 2848-49; H. Stevenson, Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society 1: 65; H. Stevenson & J. H. Gurney, jun., Zoologist 1872: 2978; E. Newman, Zoologist 1874: 4050; Lubbock, 1879; T. Southwell, Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society 5: 105; Seago, 1977; Dye, Fiszer & Allard, 2009).

History T. E. Gunn of Norwich (1871) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VI. pp. 2848-49, says: 'On the evening of the 10th instant I received a beautiful specimen of this very rare species from the Rev. S. Micklethwaite, of Hickling, who, in reply to my communication, informed me it had just been killed by Mr. F. Borrett in a marsh in that parish.

This is the first instance on record of the occurrence of White's Thrush in this county: it therefore affords me great pleasure in placing this rara avis as an additional species to our rich list of Norfolk birds. In examining the bird I made the following notes:- Total length from tip of beak to end of tail 12.62 in.; tip to tip of fully extended wings, 20.5 in.; wing from the carpal joint to the tip, 6.75 in.; tail, 5 in.; beak, length along ridge of upper mandible one and one sixteenth inch and the width at the base a quarter of an inch; tibia, 2.37 in.; tarsus, one and nine sixteenths; outer toe and claw, fifteen sixteenths of an inch; middle toe and claw, one and seven sixteenths inches; inner toe and claw, thirteen sixteenths of an inch; hinder toe and claw, 1.25 in; weight, 6.25 ounces. Beak: upper mandible brown, paler at tip; lower mandible yellowish brown, with faint pinkish tinge. Irides dark hazel, nearly black.

The feathers on the head, neck, back, scapulars and upper tail-coverts yellowish brown, tipped with black; those of the two first-mentioned parts are much paler; the primary and secondary quill-feathers are dark brown on the inner web and pale yellow-brown on the outer; the basal half of the inner web, commencing with the third primary, is of a greyish tinge, and each feather in succession attains a clearer hue up to the seventh, which is pure white; this runs throughout to the last secondary, which is greyish; upper wing-coverts black, with broad pale yellow ends. Its tail contains fourteen feathers; the four central are pale brown; the outer feather on each side is pale brown, with greyish white tip, the basal half black; in the next feather the white tip is more pure, and the black approaches nearer the end; the third, fourth and fifth have the white tips smaller in succession, very little brown on the outer webs, excepting the fifth; they are also slightly tinged with brown at the base. Under surface of plumage white, faintly tinged with yellow; feathers tipped with black, excepting the throat and abdomen, which are clear; under tail-coverts white; anterior under wing-coverts white at the base, black at the tip; under wing-coverts black at base, white at tip. Legs, toes and claws pale yellowish brown, faintly suffused with a pinkish tinge. On dissection it proved to be a male, in good condition, and rather fat, I had the breast cooked, and found the flesh firm and the flavour not unlike that of the woodcock. Its stomach was filled with the remains of some small ground-beetles and some fibrous matter, apparently roots of grass.'

Alfred Newton (1871-74 (1): 252-253, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, adds: '...and is now the property of Mr. Sotherton Micklethwait, who also has kindly submitted it to the Editor's inspection.'

H. Stevenson (1869-74) in the Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society, Vol. I. pp. 65-66, says: 'A very beautiful example of this fine Asiatic species, which till very recently was considered on of the rarest birds in the British list, was killed by Mr. F. Borrett, on the 10th of October, 1871, in a low meadow at Hickling, and by permission of its present possessor, the Rev. S. Micklethwaite, was exhibited at the November meeting of this Society, by Mr. J. H. Gurney, jun., who made some remarks upon the genus Oveoelucta as distinguished from that of Turdus. This bird, as it rose some thirty yards off, was mistaken by Mr. Borrett for a Woodcock, from its large size and peculiarity of flight; a resemblance noted in several other instances in which this thrush has occurred in this country.

A detailed description of its plumage, by Mr. T. E. Gunn, with measurements, taken before it was preserved, will be found in The Zoologist for 1871 (p. 2848). In colour and general appearance this specimen resembles very closely the figure given by Gould, in his Birds of Great Britain.'

H. Stevenson & J. H. Gurney, jun. (1872) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VII. p. 2978, say: 'Whether or not other recorded examples of this rare thrush have merely been young Missel Thrushes, as hinted in an editorial foot-note (s.s. 2912), there is no question as to the specific identity of the bird announced by Mr. T. E. Gunn (s.s. 2848) to have been killed at Hickling, in this county, on the 10th of October. Mr. Borrett, who shot it in a low-meadow within about a mile of the sea-coast, described its flight as resembling that of a Woodcock, for which bird he mistook it as it rose some thirty yards off. This very beautiful specimen is exactly represented by the figure in Gould's Birds of Great Britain.'

Edward Newman (1874) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IX. p. 4050, in a review of the species admits this record.

Southwell, Editor (1879: 52, 2nd ed.) in Lubbock's Fauna of Norfolk, says: 'A male of this beautiful Asiatic straggler was killed on 10th of October, 1871, by Mr. F. Borrett in the parish of Hickling. Its general appearance when on the wing was so much that of the Woodcock, as to lead Mr. Borrett to mistake it for one of those birds.'

Thomas Southwell (1889-94) in the Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society, Vol. V. p. 105, says: 'During the past year our Museum [Norwich] has been successful for acquiring one valuable example from a well-known county collection, but it is a matter for great regret that some of the other rarities from the same collection were dispersed by the auctioneer.

I refer to a beautiful Norfolk-killed specimen of White's Thrush, killed at Hickling in 1871, which was purchased by subscription from the collection of the late Rev. S. N. Micklethwaite of Hickling. The Museum authorities are indebted to the representatives of that gentleman for allowing them to purchase this bird privately, for had it gone to auction it would probably have realised a higher price than we should have been able to have offered for it. The bird is also a welcome memento of one who was so long known as an ardent local ornithologist and a sincere well-wisher of the Museum.'

6). 1872 Co. Durham Castle Eden Dene, shot and winged, 17th January, caught alive about two weeks later.

(J. Sclater & J. C. H. Johnstone, Field 24th Feb., 1872: 168; J. Sclater, Zoologist 1872: 3019, 3041-44, 3148-49; J. C. H. Johnstone, Field 9th March 1872; J. C. H. Johnstone, Zoologist 1872: 3019; Harting, 1872; Hancock, 1874; E. Newman, Zoologist 1874: 4050; Yarrell, 1871-85; Temperley, 1951).

History John Sclater of Castle Eden Dene (1872) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VII. p. 3019, quoting from The Field, of 2nd February, 1872, says: 'I feel sure that many of your readers will be interested in the following curious capture of White's Thrush in Castle Eden Dene, county of Durham. On the 17th of January last Mr. Burdon was shooting in the Dene, when a bird came across him, and, not knowing what it was, he fired and hit it, but it could not be found. he, however, picked up a wing-feather and some breast-feathers, which he brought home. On the 31st (a fortnight afterwards), Mr. Burdon was shooting over the same ground and came upon the bird, and after being chased some distance it was finally captured by one of the watchers, apparently but little the worse, excepting that the whole of the primary feathers of one wing were shot off, which stopped the bird's flight. It was brought home, put into a cage, and, as it eats well, I hope to be able to keep it alive.'

J. C. H. Johnstone of Castle Eden Folly (1872) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VII. p. 3019, quoting from The Field of 9th March 1872, says: 'I went over on the 12th, and again on the 18th inst., to see a specimen of White's Thrush, which had been captured in this neighbourhood, and which was then alive at Castle Eden Castle. It is totally unlike the Missel Thrush, a bird which in its immature plumage has sometimes been mistaken for it. Unfortunately, when the bird was caught the tail was considerably injured, and there are now but eight tail-feathers remaining instead of fourteen (the Missel Thrush having but twelve). By other marked characters, however, it is easily distinguished. The bird, I am sorry to say, looks very unwell, and will, I fear, die from the injuries received.'

John Sclater (1872) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VII. pp. 3041-44, adds: 'I send you full particulars of Mr. Burdon's specimen of White's Thrush, compared with a specimen of the young of the Missel Thrush in my possession.

The bird died on the nineteenth day after its capture, having received greater injuries from shot than I expected: the shoulder-bone had been broken from the blow of the shot (as the flesh was not shot through); it had strongly knit together, but was half an inch shorter than the other; the bird was a male, was very bold, and fed from my hand three days after it was caged. It ate well up till the day it died, and no doubt would have lived but for the injuries: had I been aware of these injuries I would have delayed taking dimensions of it, as I was obliged to handle it a great deal. It once or twice gave a harsh scream when handled, but I heard no note: it used the perch, always roosting upon it.

The markings were all well-defined, and alike on each side, so far as its damaged state would allow me to judge, the primaries being all shot off on one wing; the third feather of the other wing was gone also, and there were only eight feathers left in the tail. You will see from the different measurements the difference in the wing-coverts, especially the under coverts, the legs, toes and claws; in fact it is totally different, and nothing like any Missel Thrush I ever saw, and although differing from Yarrell's description it was near enough to leave no doubt with me of its being White's Thrush, and but for your asking for it I would never have troubled to write the difference. I may add, as I see a note in The Zoologist (s.s. 2942) by Lord Clifton, in which is mentioned the singular resemblance this bird has to the Woodcock on the wing, that this is exactly what Mr. Burdon told me, - he thought it was a Woodcock when he first saw it. I hope the comparative description will answer your request, and that you will give it a place in The Zoologist....'

Hancock (1874: 64-65) says: 'A specimen of this rare casual visitant was shot in Castle Eden Dene by Rowland Burdon, Esq., on the 17th January, 1872: it was only wounded and was not captured until about a fortnight afterwards, and is now in the possession of that gentleman.

A notice of this occurrence was sent to The Field newspaper, February, 1872, from which it appears that the tips of the primaries of one wing had been entirely cut off by the shot. Some of the feathers that had been shot away were kindly sent to me. It lived three weeks in captivity, and ate freely. This is the only specimen that has ever been taken in the district.'

Alfred Newton (1871-74 (1): 253, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, adds: '...when the feathers of one wing (some of which that gentleman has been so good as to send to the Editor) were cut away, and the bird thus rendered incapable of flight.

Edward Newman (1874) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IX. p. 4050, in a review of the species admits this record.

Comment Some of the feathers were sent to Alfred Newton who confirmed the identification. A very detailed description appearing in The Zoologist 1872: 3019, 3041 as written by John Sclater.'

7). 1874 Cornwall Trewithen, Probus, male, killed, January.

(E. H. Rodd, Zoologist 1874: 3880; E. H. Rodd, Field 24th Jan., 1874: 83; E. Newman, Zoologist 1874: 4051; Harting, 1880; Penhallurick, 1978).

History E. H. Rodd of Penzance (1874) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IX. p. 3880, dated 15th January, 1874, says: 'In January 1874, one of the keepers of Mr. C. T. Hawkins, of Trewithen, in the parish of Probus, killed a bird which proved to be a valuable addition to our Cornish avi-fauna, viz, a specimen of White's Thrush, which was conveyed to me by the courteous attention of his steward, Mr. W. Trethewey, who at once detected it as different from any other thrush he had ever seen, and forwarded it to me for my museum.

It differs in no particular from the bird shot by (I think) Lord Malmesbury, which is described by Mr. Yarrell in his British Birds. I think it therefore superfluous to give a description of the plumage, and shall content myself by giving the following particulars, which will answer the purpose of The Zoologist in every respect:- Length, 12½ in.; tarsus, 1½ in.; from carpal joint to end of first quill, 6½ in.; wings extended, 20½ in.; weight, 6½ ounces; number of tail-feathers, 14. Mr. Trethewey writes, "The bird attracted the notice of the keeper for some weeks before he had an opportunity of shooting it. Each time he saw it, it was feeding in some marshy ground near some ponds, and when disturbed it new to another portion of the water. The keeper thought it was a species of water-fowl. The cry was very much like that of the common thrush, but the habits quite different".'

E. H. Rodd (1874) in The Field of 24th Jan., Vol. XLIII. p. 83, says: 'I think you will be pleased to hear that I have added to the avi-fauna of Cornwall a very perfect-plumaged example of T. whitei, which was obtained this week (Jan. 17) from the parish of Probus, in the centre of the county.

I need not describe its plumage, for it corresponds exactly with Lord Malmesbury's bird described by Yarrell, and in weight and dimensions also - 6½ oz. &c.; sex, male; tail feathers, 14. I will endeavour to send you a photograph of the specimen.'

Edward Newman (1874) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IX. p. 4051, in a review of the species admits this record.

Penhallurick (1978: 236) adds: '...there are post-card photographs of it that survive.'

8). 1878 Yorkshire Whitby, hit wires, November, now at Whitby Museum.

(M. Simpson, Zoologist 1880: 68; Clarke & Roebuck, 1881; W. E. Clarke, Transactions of the Yorkshire Naturalist Union 1884: 68; Nelson, 1907; Mather, 1986).

History Martin Simpson of Whitby Museum (1880) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. IV. p. 68, says: 'In the latter part of November, 1878, I received a Thrush which I could not make out or find described in any book on birds then accessible to me. It looked not unlike a young Missel Thrush, but its greater length and other peculiarities, such as the possession of fourteen tail-feathers, precluded its identification with that species.

I have since shown it to one or two ornithologists, and your opinion, based on the description which I sent you, leaves me no longer in doubt that the bird is a White's Thrush, Turdus varius, of Pallas. It had killed itself by coming in contact with a telegraph wire, and had displaced and injured several of the neck feathers, but was otherwise in good condition. It has been preserved for the Museum here, and forms an interesting addition to our collection of county birds.'

Wm. Eagle Clarke (1884: 68) in the Transactions of the Yorkshire Naturalist Union, says: 'In the latter part of November, 1878, Mr. Martin Simpson, curator of the Whitby Museum, received a bird of this species which had been killed by coming in contact with the telegraph wires near that town (Zoologist 1880: 68). The specimen is now in the Whitby Museum, where the writer has seen it.'

Accepted locally (Clarke & Roebuck 1881: 18; Nelson 1907 (1): 13; Mather 1986).

9). 1878 Borders Hardacres, Berwickshire, shot, last week of December, now at Kelso Museum.

(Land And Water 1879; A. Brotherston, History of the Berwickshire Naturalists' Club 8: 518; J. E. Harting, Zoologist 1879: 133-134; J. A. Harvie-Brown, Proceedings of the Natural History Society of Glasgow 4: 158-159; A. Brotherston, Zoologist 1879: 177; A. Brotherston, Scottish Naturalist 5: 78-79; A. H. Evans, Scottish Naturalist 11: 103; Evans, 1911; Bolam, 1912; Witherby, 1920-24; Scottish Naturalist 68: 120-122; Thom, 1986; Forrester & Andrews et al., 2007).

History Andrew Brotherston (1876-78) in the History of the Berwick Naturalists' Club, Vol. VIII. p. 518, and (1879-80) in the Scottish Naturalist, Vol. V. pp. 78-79, says: 'During the last week of December, 1878, a specimen of this very rare and beautiful Thrush was shot by Mr. Forbes Burn, at Hardacres, Berwickshire.

Not being aware of its rarity, unfortunately only a portion of the bird was saved - the head and wings, unskinned, with part of the skin of the breast and back - and forwarded to me on the 22nd of January following, to preserve as an ornament for a lady's hat. I immediately took the necessary steps to try and secure what was left of it for the ornithological collection of the Tweedside Physical and Antequarian Society, which were successful, the owner very promptly and kindly presenting it to that Society.

The relative lengths of the primaries may be interesting, as they differ from Yarrell's measurements of the original British specimen, which was shot by Lord Malmesbury in Hampshire, January 24th, 1828, and named after White of Selborne by Mr. Eyton, who was not aware that it had been previously named T. varius, and described by Pallas as an inhabitant of Siberia.

Length of wing from carpal joint, 6⅜ in.; first feather very short, 1¼ in.; the second feather in the right wing is ¼ in. (probably not being full grown); and in the left about ⅛ in. shorter than the fourth. (The second and fourth in Lord Malmesbury's specimen were equal.) The third is the longest in the wing, being about ⅛ in. longer than the fourth. Length of bill from gape, one inch four lines. The marking on the head is also different.

Yarrell says, "The feathers on the upper part of the head and neck, yellow-brown, tipped with black". In this specimen these feathers are black (becoming lighter on the basal half as they go backwards), with a yellow-brown spot about one-sixteenth of an inch from the tip. In other respects, so far as one can be seen, it agrees with his description....Mr. Burn told me that the one he shot, resembled a Hawk when on the wing; and that some small birds which were feeding on the ground, took flight on its approach.

In Yarrell's lifetime there appears to have been great confusion between the true T. varius and other allied species, viz:- T. horsfieldi (T. varius, Horsfield) a native of Java; T. dauma, an Indian thrush, and, T. lunulatus from Australia; examples of one or other of these birds, frequently impersonating the true T. varius in collections. I am much indebted to Professor Newton, who has seen and examined this specimen, for a large amount of interesting information concerning these Thrushes. He writes, "at least nine examples of this bird have been before now killed in Britain.

They are: - 1. Christchurch, Hants, 24th January, 1828. 2. Bandon, Cork, December, 1842. 3. Welford, Warwickshire, 26th January, 1859. 4. Ballymahon, Longford, 1867. 5. Hestercombe, Somerset, January, 1870. 6. Langsford, Somerset, 6th January, 1871. 7. Hickling, Norfolk, 10th October, 1871. 8. Castle Eden, Durham, 31st January, 1874. 9. Probus, Cornwall, early in January, 1874".

After mentioning the example said to have been killed in the New Forest (the Australian bird, T. lunulatus) and another example recorded as having been killed near Huddersfield, which, he thinks, also wants confirmation, he says: - "I have heard also of three others having been seen - one in Kent, one in Yorkshire, and one in Durham". "On comparison with a specimen that has been long mounted, the fresh beauty of the colours in yours is very decidedly marked, yet I fear nothing can be done to preserve its tints, and that when as many years have elapsed their richness will have disappeared. I have wholly failed to find and indication that would enable me to determine the sex or age of your bird. There is no question about its being the true T. varius of Pallas, though the tail is wanting - an unfortunate thing, as therein lies one of the most curious characters of this species - one that is possessed so far as I know, by only one other species of Thrush (T. horsfieldi) - the presence of fourteen instead of twelve rectrices".'

J. E. Harting (1879) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. III. pp. 133-134, says: 'During the last week of September, 1878, a Thrush, supposed to be of this species, was shot by Mr. Forbes Burn, at Hardacres, Berwickshire. Not being aware of its rarity, only a portion of the bird was saved - the head and wings unskinned, with part of the skin of the breast and back - and forwarded to Mr. Brotherston, taxidermist, of Kelso, to be converted into an ornament for a lady's hat.

Fortunately, Mr. Brotherston, communicating the circumstance in a note which was published in Land and Water on the first of the present month of February, remarked that the relative length of the primaries differ from the measurements given by Yarrell in his description of the specimen in Lord Malmesbury's collection.

He writes: - "Length of wing from carpal joint, 6⅜ inches; first feather very short, 1¼ inch; the second in the right wing is ¼ inch; and in the left about ⅛ in. shorter than the fourth. The second and fourth in Lord Malmesbury's specimen were equal. The third is the longest in the wing, being about ⅛ in. longer than the fourth. Length of bill from gape, one inch four lines. The marking on the head is also different.

Yarrell says: '...the feathers on the upper part of the head and neck, yellow-brown tipped with black.' In this specimen these feathers are black (becoming lighter on the basal half as they go backwards), with a yellow-brown spot about one-sixteenth of an inch from the tip. In other respects it agrees with his description, so far as can be seen.'

These variations suggest the idea that the bird in question may not be White's Thrush after all, but possibly an allied species of the genus. (See Prof. Newton's edition of Yarrell's British Birds, Vol. I. p. 255, where the distinguishing characters are pointed out). It would be desirable, therefore, to compare the specimen in question carefully with examples of the other allied forms referred to, with a view to place its identity beyond doubt. Mr. Brotherston has since written to me to say: that another bird of the kind was seen on January 19th by Mr. A. Steel, a gentleman well acquainted with all our common birds and many of our rarer ones. It was feeding on a bare sandy spot under some large willows near Kelso Bridge. He had an excellent view of it before it took flight into Springwood Park, and, after seeing the remains of the Hardacres specimen, he is convinced that it belonged to the same species. Both birds were solitary.'

J. A. Harvie-Brown (1878-80) in the Proceedings of the Natural History Society of Glasgow, Vol. IV. pp. 158-159, says: 'One was shot at Hardacres, near Kelso [in last week of December, 1878].

Unhappily, the young farmer who shot the bird did not know its value, but partially skinned and ate the treasure, the wings and head and throat only being preserved to decorate the head-dress of his sister. Mr. Brotherston of Kelso at once perceived its rarity value, and was permitted to preserve the mutilated remains for the Kelso Museum.

They are quite enough to prove the identity of the bird, and, preserved as Mr. Brotherston has done, with extended wings, head, and throat, may so be disposed in a case that the parts a-wanting may not be much missed.' [Dr. F. Douglas, Kelso, in litt., 29th January, 1879.]

A. Brotherston of Kelso (1879) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. III. p. 177, says: 'There is doubt whatever that the thrush shot at Hardacres (p. 133), in the last week of December, 1878 - not September, as misprinted - is the true Turdus varius, Pallas (T. whitei, Eyton).

After reading my notice of its occurrence which appeared in Land and Water, Professor Newton, through the same paper, expressed his desire to see it, which he has now done. He writes: - "On comparison with a specimen that has long been mounted, the fresh beauty of the colour in yours is decidedly marked; yet I fear nothing can be done to preserve its tints, and that when as many years have elapsed their richness will have disappeared. I have wholly failed to find any indication that would enable me to determine the sex or age of your bird....There is no question about its being the true Turdus varius of Pallas, though the tail is wanting, an unfortunate thing, as therein lies one of the most curious characters of this species - one that is possessed, so far as I know, by only one other species of Thrush - the presence of fourteen instead of twelve rectrices". In the description of the wings taken from Land and Water the words "right" and "left" should be transposed.'

Accepted locally (Evans 1911: 54) and by Bolam (1912: 14) who adds: 'This specimen was shot by Mr. Forbes Burn at Hardacres, Berwickshire, in the last week of December, 1878, and recorded by the late Andrew Brotherston (History of the Berwickshire Naturalists' Club, Vol. VIII. p. 518). The remains of the bird were preserved by Brotherston for the Kelso Museum.'

Forrester & Andrews et al. (2007 (2): 1123) add: 'Fate of specimen unknown after closure of Kelso Museum.'

10). 1881 Devon Dene Wood, near Ashburton, shot, 11th January.

(E. W. H. Holdsworth, Zoologist 1881: 108; "R.N.S." Field 19th Feb., 1881: 255; D'Urban & Mathew, 1892; Moore, 1969).

History E. W. H. Holdsworth of St. John's Wood (1881) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. V. p. 108, says: 'A good specimen of this Eastern Asiatic Thrush was killed by Mr. E. Studdy in Dene Wood, near Ashburton, Devon, during the severe cold weather in January last. It was in company with three or four birds of apparently the same species, and when flushed was mistaken for a Woodcock from its heavy flight.

The species was first observed in England in 1828, as recorded by Yarrell, and the example now under notice appears to be the ninth that has been obtained in England since that date. The species is best known from Japan and China, and was described by Pallas under the name of Turdus varius. The specimen last killed was exhibited by me at a meeting of the Zoological Society on the 15th inst., and the species was fully recognised.'

[This makes the sixteenth instance in which Turdus varius has been reported to have been met with in the British Islands. A dozen instances are recorded in the Handbook of British Birds, published in 1872, since which date four others, including that above noticed, have been recorded.]

"R.N.S." (1881) in The Field of 19th Feb., Vol. LVII. p. 255, says: 'It will be of interest to naturalists to hear of the occurrence of White's Thrush in England, shot on the 11th of January last, near Dene, on edge of Dartmoor, Devonshire, by my brother, who writes to me as follows: - "When beating for Woodcock on oak scrub , the sunny side of a valley, with stream running through middle, I shot this bird as it rose in front of beaters, who sung out "Mark cock.' It was in company with others, one of which we shot, and turned out to be the common Mistletoe Thrush. As we could get no more, I cannot say: how many of either kind there were".

The specimen has been preserved, and was exhibited at the last meeting of the Zoological Society, by Mr. E. W. Holdsworth, who tells me there is no British specimen at present in the British Museum.'

[This rare eastern thrush, which is found in Siberia, China, Japan, and Formosa, was first noticed as an accidental visitor to this country in January, 1828, when one was shot at Christchurch, Hants. Since that date specimens have been met with in various parts of England, and almost always in winter. In Mr. Harting's Handbook of British Birds particulars of a dozen instances of its occurrence are noted to 1872. Since that date three or four more have been met with. Of all these, only one reached Ireland. This was obtained at Ballymahon, Co. Longford, 1867. - Ed.]

D'Urban & Mathew (1892: 5-6) say: 'An example was shot by Mr. E. Stoddy, in Dene Wood, on the edge of Dartmoor, near Ashburton, January 11th, 1881. It was in company with three or four other birds, apparently of the same species.'

11). 1881 Yorkshire Rimswell, near Withernsea, shot, early November, now at Yorkshire Museum, York.

(W. E. Clarke, Transactions of the Yorkshire Naturalist Union 1884: 68; W. E. Clarke & W. D. Roebuck, Naturalist 1883-84 (9): 150; W. E. Clarke & W. D. Roebuck, Zoologist 1884: 174; J. Cordeaux, Zoologist 1891: 361; Nelson, 1907; Mather, 1986).

History Wm. Eagle Clarke (1884) in the Transactions of the Yorkshire Naturalist Union, p. 68, says: 'During the first week in November, 1881, a White's Thrush was shot at Rimswell, near Withernsea, in Holderness, by Mr. W. J. Tuton, who mistook it for a Woodcock as it rose from a low, thick hedge close to him. This specimen is now in the collection of Mr. R. T. Burnham, of Rimswell, to whom I am indebted for these particulars, and for several opportunities of examining his beautiful specimen.'

W. E. Clarke & W. D. Roebuck (1883-84) in the new series of The Naturalist, Vol. IX. p. 150, and (1884) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. VIII. p. 174, record the above particulars.

J. Cordeaux (1891) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XV. p. 361, says: 'One, now in a small private collection of birds belonging to Mr. R. T. Burnham, of Rimswell, near Withernsea, was shot in that neighbourhood in November, 1881 (Zool., 1882, p. 174).'

Accepted locally (Nelson 1907 (1): 13; Mather 1986).

12). 1882 Yorkshire Waplington Manor, near Pocklington, shot, early January.

(P. Inchbald, Field 11th Feb., 1882: 201; J. Backhouse, jnr., Zoologist 1882: 74; W. E. Clarke & W. D. Roebuck, Zoologist 1884: 174; J. Cordeaux, Zoologist 1891: 361; Nelson, 1907; Mather, 1986).

History Peter Inchbald of Harrogate (1882) in The Field of 11th Feb., Vol. LIX. p. 201, says: 'A specimen of this rare thrush was shot early in January at Pocklington, in the East Riding of Yorkshire, and was sent to Mr. Ripley of York, for preservation.' [We have received notice from two other correspondents of the recent occurrence of this bird in Yorkshire. A full account of the species will be found in the first volume of Professor Newton's edition of Yarrell's British Birds. - Ed.]

J. Backhouse, jnr., of York (1882) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. VI. p. 74, says: 'Early in January a specimen of White's Thrush, Turdus varius, was obtained at Waplington Manor, near Pocklington. According to Messrs. Clarke & Roebuck's recently published Handbook to the Vertebrate Fauna of Yorkshire, this makes the fourth example of this bird taken in our country [sic]. From its size and markings I incline to regard it as a male bird, but as the sex was not ascertained when the bird was skinned, so far as I know, it is difficult to pronounce with any certainty.'

W. E. Clarke & W. D. Roebuck (1884) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. VIII. p. 174, record the above particulars.

J. Cordeaux (1891) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XV. p. 361, adds: 'This specimen was in the possession of Mr. J. J. Leman, late M.P. for York, at the time of his death.'

Accepted locally (Nelson 1907 (1): 13; Mather 1986).

13). 1886 Isles of Scilly Abbey Gardens, Tresco, killed, 2nd December, photo, now at Isles of Scilly Museum.

(Anon., Transactions of the Penzance Natural History Society 1884-88: 290; T. Cornish, Zoologist 1887: 114; J. H. Gurney, jun., Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society 4: 428; J. Clark & F. R. Rodd, Zoologist 1906: 243; Penhallurick, 1978; Flood, Hudson & Thomas, 2007: plate 113).

History Anon (1884-88) in the Transactions of the Penzance Natural History Society, Vol. II. p. 290, says: '...Stuffed by Vingoe and now at Tresco Abbey.'

Thomas Cornish of Penzance (1887) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. XI. p. 114, says: 'Early in December last the butler of Mr. Dorrien-Smith killed at Tresco, Scilly, a bird which he thought to be a large Missel Thrush. Fortunately he showed it to Mr. Smith, who at once sent it on to Mr. W. H. Vingoe, of this place, with whom I saw it. It is unmistakeably a specimen of "White's Thrush", of the ordinary size and plumage.'

J. H. Gurney, jun. (1884-89) in the Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society, Vol. IV. p. 448, says: 'Mr. Dorrien Smith has begun a collection of Scillonian birds to which, since Mr. Bidwell's visit, has been added White's Thrush, shot by his butler, Mr. G. Britton, on December 2nd, 1886. This is the eighteenth British specimen. It frequented the Abbey gardens for three weeks; November is therefore the month which should be accredited with it, and not December.'

J. Clark & F. R. Rodd (1906) in The Zoologist, 4th series, Vol. X. p. 243, under 'The Birds of Scilly', say: 'A single specimen of White's Thrush was shot by George Britton in the Abbey Gardens on Dec., 2nd, 1886.'

Comment Now in the Isles of Scilly Museum (2004).

14). 1892 Shropshire Moreton Corbet, shot, 14th January, now at Ludlow Museum (Acc. No. SHYMS: Z/2006/123).

(G. Cooke, Field 30th Jan., 1892: 133; Forrest, 1899, photo; Forrest, 1908; Rutter, Gribble & Pemberyon, 1964; Smith et al., 2019: phot0).

History G. Cooke of Dogpole, Shrewsbury (1892) in The Field of 30th Jan., Vol. LXXIX. p.133, says: 'For more than thirty years I have been a practical bird preserver, and nearly all the British birds have passed through my hands three or four times. But I never had a White's Thrush in the flesh till now, but only skins of that bird. This one measured 12½ in. in length, and had fourteen feathers in the tail. It was very fat, with a crop full of worms. It was badly shot, particularly about head and neck, but has made a very fair specimen. It was sent to me on Jan. 16. The sender told me he it had been dead three or four days, and that the owner would call upon me about it, but I have not seen him yet. The bird was killed about six miles from Shrewsbury. I cannot give any further particulars till I see the man who shot it. You can see it if you wish when it is dry enough to forward.'

Accepted locally (Forrest 1899: 104-107).

H. E. Forrest (1908 (1): 161) in the Victoria County History of Shropshire, says: 'A specimen of this large and boldly-marked species was shot by one of Sir Vincent Corbet’s keepers at Moreton Corbet, 14 January 1892. It was purchased by the late Mr. W. E. Beckwith and is now in the possession of Miss Beckwith, Radbrook, Shrewsbury.'

Smith et al. (2019) state the specimen is now in Shropshire Museums in Ludlow Museum Resource Centre (SHYMS: Z/2006/123). It was preserved by G. Cooke, Taxidermist of Dogpole, Shrewsbury. Beckwith's brother, Capt. Henry Beckwith presented the specimen to Shropshire Museums in Ludlow Museum Resource Centre (SHYMS: Z/2006/123).

15). 1894 Essex Langley, shot, January.

(Miller Christy, 1903; Glegg, 1929; Hudson & Pyman, 1968; Cox, 1984; Wood, 2007).

History R. Miller Christy (1903 (1): 237) in the Victoria County History of Essex, says: 'The only example known to have been obtained in the county was shot, in January 1894, in Langley High Wood. It now belongs to Mr. W. H. Rolfe of Clavering, who has been good enough to submit it to me for identification.'

Glegg (1929: 81-82) says: 'Mr. Christy states that one was shot in Langley High Wood, which is the north-west corner of Essex, near the Hertfordshire border, in January, 1894. The bird was obtained by a member of a shooting party conducted by the late Mr. H. Rolfe of Clavering. The bird was at first mistaken for a Woodcock, and, although badly shot, was successfully preserved by Travis, of Saffron Walden. The sex was not noted.

The specimen was submitted for examination to Mr. Christy by Mr. W. H. Rolfe, of Brooklands, Clavering, in whose possession the bird was. I have endeavoured to trace this specimen but without success.'

Wood (2007: 55) states that BBRC have accepted this record.

Comment BBRC don't rule on pre 1950 records, it is up to each individual County Records Committee.

16). 1898 Sussex Hove, in a garden for two to three weeks when found dead, 26th September, now at Booth Museum, Brighton.

(W. R. Ogilvie-Grant, Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club 33: 133-134; Eds., British Birds 8: 55; Walpole-Bond, 1938; Shrubb, 1979).

History W. R. Ogilvie-Grant, Editor (1913) in the Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club, Vol. XXXIII. pp. 133-134, says: 'Mr. A. F. Griffith exhibited...a British-killed specimen of White's Thrush. The fine adult bird shown was picked up dead in a garden in Hove, Sussex, on the 26th of September, 1898, and brought on the same day to the late Mr. Henry Cooke, of Wilbury Road. It was sent to Messrs. Pratt to be mounted, where Mr. Griffith inspected the bird in the flesh. On Mr. Cooke's death in 1914 he bequeathed the bird, with his residue, to Mr. Jennings, who presented it to the Booth Museum.'

In an Editorial (1914) in British Birds, Vol. VIII. p. 55, they say: "At the May meeting of the British Ornithologists' Club, Mr. A. F. Griffith exhibited a specimen of Turdus d. aureus, which had been picked up dead in a garden at Hove, Sussex, on September 26th, 1898. Mr. Griffith himself inspected the bird in the flesh at the time. It was recently presented to the Booth Museum.'

Accepted locally by Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 57) who adds: '...it was picked up dead in the small garden of 27, Wilbury Road, Hove, then the residence of Mr. H. Cooke...who had noticed the bird there on and off for two or three weeks previously.'

17). 1898 Warwickshire Packington, shot, late October.

(P. Spicer, Field 5th Nov., 1898: 742; Saunders, 1899; Tomes, 1904; Norris, 1947; Harrison et al., 1982; Harrison & Harrison, 2005).

History Peter Spicer, Taxidermist, of Leamington (1898) in The Field of 5th Nov., Vol. XCII. p. 742, says: 'A specimen of this rare thrush has just been sent to me to "set up" for the Earl of Aylesford, and was shot on his estate at Packington, near Coventry.'

[It may be remarked that most of the occurrences of this thrush in the British Islands have been in the winter, the one now noticed being, we believe, the second which has been procured in October; but on Heligoland about a dozen have been met with in autumn (September and October) as well as in spring. It is a native of Siberia and China. It is something like a Mistle Thrush, but with black crescentic markings, a light patch on the middle of the underside of the wing, and fourteen tail feathers instead of twelve. - Ed.]

Saunders (1899: 755, 2nd ed.) under 'Appendix' says: 'In The Field for November 5th, 1898, Mr. Peter Spicer, taxidermist, of Leamington, stated that he had just received an example shot at Packington, near Coventry.'

Tomes (1904 (1): 190) in the Victoria County History of Warwickshire, says: 'A bird of this species, which had been shot at Packington, was brought to Mr. Peter Spicer of Leamington, the son of the veteran taxidermist of Warwick, for preservation. The occurrence was duly recorded in The Field of November 5, 1898.'

Norris (1947: 27) says: 'The second record for Warwickshire was of a bird shot near Packington in the autumn of 1895, and sent to Spicer's at Leamington for preservation.'

Accepted locally stating the year as 1895 (Harrison et al. 1982; Harrison & Harrison 2005: 372).

Comment Some discrepancy in the date.

18). 1902 Yorkshire Luddenden Dean, near Halifax, shot, 18th December, photo., now at Halifax Museum.

(A. Crabtree, Halifax Naturalist 7: 101-103; T. T. Sheppard & T. W. Woodhead, Naturalist 29: 68, photo; Ed., Zoologist 1903: 116; Nelson, 1907, photo; H. F. Witherby & N. F. Ticehurst, British Birds 1: 53; Nelson, 1907; Mather, 1986).

History A. Crabtree (1903) in The Halifax Naturalist, Vol. VII. pp. 101-103, says: 'It gives me great satisfaction to be able to record this exceedingly rare bird for the Parish of Halifax. A specimen. in the flesh, of what was stated to be a peculiarly marked thrush, was brought to Mr. Cunningham at the Belle Vue Museum, on Dec., 20th, 1902; this had been shot two days previously, viz., Dec. 18th, in Luddenham Dean.

Mr. Cunningham being struck with the appearance of this specimen, thoroughly examined it and came to the conclusion that it was a White's Thrush. He sent for me before skinning it and I identified it as a specimen of this rare bird; I have compared it with the authoritative descriptions and drawings of Howard Saunders and Morris, and have not the slightest hesitation in stating that it is an exceedingly good specimen of Turdus whitei. It is now set up and can be seen at the Halifax Natural History Museum. From the tip of the beak to the end of the tail it measures 12 inches, closed wing 6½ inches, and tail 4 inches.

The first example recorded in Britain was shot in Hampshire, in January, 1828, and was named by Eyton White's Thrush, in honour of Gilbert White who resided in that county....The bird in Mr. Cunningham's possession answers in the minutest detail the description given by Yarrell of the first British specimen. "Bill dark brown, except the base of the upper mandible, which is pale yellow brown, the feathers tipped with black; neck in front white, the feathers tipped with crescent-shaped black spots; nape yellow brown, the feathers tipped with black, chin and throat, white; breast white, with a tinge of yellowish brown, all the feathers tipped with a black crescent, with a faint yellowish brown band across its lower part, and dusky on the flanks; back yellow-brown, darker than on the head, the feathers tipped in the form of a crescent with black, the shaft of each feather yellow. The wings rather short, and do not reach far over the tail; greater wing coverts, dark brown with light yellowish brown ends, forming together two oblique bars, the outer webs dull yellowish; lesser wing coverts also yellowish brown, with broad pale yellow ends, with a large spot of black, the shafts yellow brown. The tail has the four middle feathers uniform pale brown, the others darker in the webs but lighter at the ends, and of these the outer ones are the lightest; underneath it is greyish brown, the shafts of the feathers white; upper laid coverts yellow brown, darker than on the head, the feathers tipped in the form of a crescent with black, the shaft of each feather yellow; under tail-coverts white. Legs and toes pale brown, the claws rather lighter and horn colour.' I may add: that the tail feathers are all tipped with white, a fact which Mr. Howard Saunders noted in specimens which came under his notice. The capture of this specimen enables me to add: one more bird to my list of "The Birds of the Parish of Halifax".'

T. T. Sheppard & T. W. Woodhead, Editors (1903) in the new series of The Naturalist, Vol. XXIX. p. 68, say: "What is apparently the fourth example of White's Thrush recorded for Yorkshire has just been placed in the Halifax Museum, having been shot at Luddenham Dean, near Halifax, on December 18th last. The first example of this species recorded in Britain was shot in Hampshire in 1828, and Eyton gave it the name of White's Thrush (Turdus whitei), in honour of Gilbert White. Previous Yorkshire records are: - Huddersfield (1864), Danby-in-Cleveland (1870), and Whitby (1878).

A full account of the latest specimen appears in The Halifax Naturalist for February, from the pen of Mr. A. Crabtree, F.L.S., which is illustrated by the accompanying block, kindly lent by the Editor.'

In an Editorial (1903) in The Zoologist, 4th series, Vol. VII. p. 116, he says: 'What is apparently the fourth example of White's Thrush (Turdus whitei) recorded for Yorkshire has just been placed in the Halifax Museum, having been shot in Luddenham Dean, near Halifax, on Dec. 18th last.'

Nelson (1907 (1): 13) says: 'On the 18th December 1902, one was taken at Luddenham Dean, Halifax, and brought in the flesh to the curator of the Belle Vue Museum, the late Mr. J. Cunningham, whose opinion as to its identity was confirmed by Mr. F. A. Crabtree, F.L.S., and the particulars thereof communicated by him to the Halifax Naturalist, February 1903. The specimen is now in the Halifax Museum.'

Admitted by H. F. Witherby & N. F. Ticehurst (1907) in British Birds, Vol. I. p. 53, under 'On the More Important Additions to our Knowledge of British Birds since 1899', adding: 'Fourth record for Yorkshire.'

19). 1913 North-east Scotland Castlehill, Aberdeen, Aberdeenshire, flew into window and died, 6th October.

(A. L. Thomson, Scottish Naturalist 34: 201; Eds., British Birds 8: 124; J. Simpson, Transactions of the Aberdeen Working Men's Natural History and Scientific Society 3: 175-176; Witherby, 1920-24; Scottish Naturalist 68: 120-122; Thom, 1986).

History A. Landsborough Thomson (1914) in the Scottish Naturalist, Vol. XXXIV. p. 201, says: 'An example of this species killed itself against a window in the Castlehill, Aberdeen, on 6th October, 1913. It was at once brought to the late Mr. George Sim's shop, where I saw it some time later. There is not the slightest reason to doubt the history of the specimen, which thus constitutes the second record for Scotland.'

In an Editorial (1914) in British Birds, Vol. VIII. p. 124, they say: 'Mr. A. L. Thomson records (Scot. Nat. 1914, p. 201) that an example of Turdus d. aureus was killed by flying against a window in the Castlehill, Aberdeen, on October 6th, 1913.'

James Simpson of Aberdeen (1912-16) in the Transactions of the Aberdeen Working Men's Natural History and Scientific Society, Vol. III. pp. 175-176, says: 'An undoubted example of this rare Eastern species was brought to me for identification in the beginning of October, 1913. It had dashed itself against the window of Mr. J. Smith, corkcutter, Castle Terrace. When Mr. Smith went out to see what had struck the window, he found the bird lying on the pavement still alive, but so much injured that it died shortly afterwards.

As far as I am aware, this is the first occurrence of this species north of the Forth. There has been recorded quite a number of instances of this bird being seen in England, mostly in the winter months, and only one recorded for October.'

20). 1914 Northumberland Holy Island, seen, 2nd November.

(E. L. Turner, British Birds 8: 172; Galloway & Meek, 1978-83).

History Emma L. Turner (1914) in British Birds, Vol. VIII. p. 172, says: 'On November 2nd, 1914, when walking round Holy Island, I saw a curious looking bird feeding on a rock near some Starlings. There was a gale blowing and the rain made it impossible to use binoculars, but the bird was so tired that it allowed me to approach and stand within six feet of it and note down its appearance, so that glasses were fortunately unnecessary.

It was without any doubt a White's Thrush (Turdus d. aureus); the back speckled with black, the buff edgings to the wing-coverts, and the black crescent-shaped spots on the flanks were its most conspicuous features. There had been a north-east gale blowing for two days and nights. There appears to be no previous record of White's Thrush for Northumberland.'

21). 1928 Suffolk Ampton Park, Bury St Edmunds, shot, 3rd December.

(N. B. Kinnear, Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club 49: 58; Eds., British Birds 22: 230; Ticehurst, 1932; Piotrowski, 2003).

History N. B. Kinnear, Editor (1929) in the Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club, Vol. XLIX. p. 58, at the 324th Meeting of the Club held on 9th January 1929 at Pagani's Restaurant, London, says: 'Dr. Hartert, also showed, on behalf of Lord Rothschild, a British specimen of White's Thrush, Turdus dauma aureus Holandre (Turdus varius Pallas, Turdus whitei, Eyton). It was shot at Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, on December 3, 1928, by Sir Pierce Lacy, Bart., and stuffed by Rowland Ward Ltd. It is now 100 years ago since the first specimen was shot near Christchurch.'

In an Editorial (1929) in British Birds, Vol. XXII. p. 230, they say: 'At the January meeting of the British Ornithologists' Club, Dr. E. Hartert exhibited on behalf of Lord Rothschild a specimen of Turdus d. aureus, which had been shot at Bury St. Edmunds on December 3rd, 1928 (Bull. B.O.C., XLIX. p. 58).'

Ticehurst (1932: 158) says: 'A second example [for Suffolk] was shot by Sir Pierce Lacy at Ampton Park, Bury St Edmunds, on 3rd December, 1928.' It was accepted locally (Piotrowski 2003: 253).

22). 1929 Fair Isle Midway, adult male, shot, 19th October, now at National Museums of Scotland (NMSZ 1929.151.1).

(G. Stout, Scottish Naturalist 50: 8; Eds., British Birds 24: 84; Scottish Naturalist 68: 120-122; Thom, 1986; Dymond, 1991; Forrester & Andrews et al., 2007).

History George Stout of Fair Isle (1930) in the Scottish Naturalist, Vol. L. p. 8, says: 'An adult male example of this Thrush was obtained here on 19th October. The specimen is now in the Royal Scottish Museum.'

[This Thrush, Turdus aureus, is very rare in Scotland. This is the third which has occurred; the two previous being one in Berwickshire in 1878 and one in Aberdeenshire in 1913. The latter is now, we understand, in Lord Garioch's collection. - Eds.]

In an Editorial (1930) in British Birds, Vol. XXIV. p. 84, they say: 'An adult male was obtained on October 19th, 1929, and is now in the Royal Scottish Museum. This is only the third recorded occurrence in Scotland (G. Stout, p. 8).'

Forrester & Andrews et al. (2007 (2): 1123) say: 'Specimen now at National Museums of Scotland (NMSZ 1929.151.1).'

23). 1944 Fair Isle North Shirva, male, shot, 18th October, now at Fair Isle Bird Observatory.

(G. Waterston, British Birds 38: 229; Scottish Naturalist 1956: 120-122; Thom, 1986; Dymond, 1991; Pennington et al., 2004).

History G. Waterston (1945) in British Birds, Vol. XXXVIII. p. 228, under 'Notes from Fair Isle, 1939-45, says: 'White's Thrush - A fine male was obtained by James A. Stout on 18th October 1944. He described the bird as being very skulking and difficult to approach. The note was heard about twenty times and resembled the noise a Starling Sturnus vulgaris, makes when it is caught, except that it was longer, sharper and shriller. The sun was shining when the bird was seen, and it had a habit of always flying into the shade after being flushed. In its ground movements, it resembled the Redwings Turdus iliacus, in the habit of "keeping flattened out" as it ran about. This is the second record for Fair Isle and the fourth for Scotland.'

Pennington et al. (2004) adds: 'It is still on display in Fair Isle Bird Observatory.'

Comment Unknown whether this specimen was lost in the fire of 2019.

24). 1948 Fair Isle Burrashield, seen, mid-November.

(Williamson, 1965; BOU, 1971; Thom, 1986; Dymond, 1991).

History P. E. Davis (1965) in Williamson lists one as seen mid-November 1948.

D. W. Snow, Editor for the BOU (1971: 219) lists one for Fair Isle in 1948.

Dymond (1991: 95) adds: 'J. A. Stout saw one at Burrashield in November, 1948.'

1950-57 RECORDS

25). 1952 Devon Lundy, 15th October to 8th November.

(P. E. Davis, British Birds 46: 437; P. E. Davis, British Birds 46: 455; Moore, 1969).

History P. E. Davis (1953) in British Birds, Vol. XLVI. p. 437, says: 'One in Millcombe October 15th to November 8th. First definite occurrence on Lundy.'

P. E. Davis (1953) in British Birds, Vol. XLVI. p. 455, says: ' A White's Thrush (Turdus dauma) was present on Lundy from October 15th to November 8th, 1952. It remained throughout its stay in a small, densely-wooded part of Millcombe, in the south-east of the island.

Although frequently feeding on open sward near the owner's residence, it was extremely shy, and fled at once into cover when disturbed, and none of the observers who saw the bird was able to watch it at leisure.

On October 15th I watched the bird for a few seconds at a range of barely 10 feet, and this view, with many subsequent glimpses, provided an adequate description. It was a large thrush, about the size of a Mistle-Thrush (T. viscivorus), both species being seen at once on November 3rd. The upper-parts were a rich golden-brown, each feather tipped with a crescentic black mark. This pattern extended to the base of the tail, and could be seen clearly at a considerable distance. The under-parts were paler, with similar markings. The under-wing showed a striking pattern in flight, black with a white bar. The outer tail-feathers had distinct white tips. The soft parts were apparently dark brown. No call was heard at any time.

The bird was seen on several occasions by Miss Mary Gade and John Ogilvie, and once by F. W. Gade.'

26). 1956 Perth & Kinross Pitcarmick, Strathardle, Perthshire, male, shot, 3rd January.

(J. W. Campbell, Scottish Naturalist 68: 120-122; E. V. Baxter, Scottish Naturalist 69: 175; Thom, 1986).

History J. W. Campbell (1956) in the Scottish Naturalist, Vol. LXVIII. pp. 120-122, says: 'Early in January 1956, Mr. William Davidson, Curator of the Art Gallery and Museum, Perth, received a White's Thrush (Turdus dauma) from the Marquess of Lansdowne. The bird was sent to Messrs. P. D. Malloch for preservation.

I am greatly indebted to Sir Michael G. Nairn, on whose property this interesting bird was killed, for the following details of its capture: "During a rough shoot on 3rd January of this year at Pitcarmick, Strathardle, this bird was shot in a birchwood by a walking gun in the belief that it was a woodcock, as there were quite a number of them about on that particular day. The gun in question was the Hon. John Dewar of Dupplin Castle. When he went to collect the bird he was surprised to find that it was not a woodcock, but thought it was an ordinary thrush. It was only perchance that he picked it up and gave it to my gamekeeper, who (again perchance) happened to put it in his game bag. Only at the end of the day when the rest of the bag was being counted and examined, was it realised that this bird was not an ordinary thrush".

The Marquess of Landsowne, who was also a member of the party, asked me if he could have it identified and if necessary mounted, to which I agreed. "To my knowledge, such a bird has never been seen in that area before, or since; but in flight it would be nearly impossible to distinguish. In that area there was a severe northerly gale on the night of 1st January, but apart from that there were no other exceptional weather conditions.

It is interesting to find that Yarrell (A History of British Birds, 4th edn. (1871), I. 254), writing of the several examples obtained in Europe, remarks that they were flushed from ground covered with dead leaves, and that this "coupled with their mottled plumage and their large wings has in some instances led to their having been mistaken at the time for Woodcocks".

Howard Saunders (An Illustrated Manual of British Birds, 2nd edn. (1899), p. n.) says the same of several of the specimens obtained in Great Britain.

This Perthshire bird, identified by dissection as a male, had already been mounted when I saw it at Messrs. Malloch's. Mr. A. Jamieson, taxidermist, told me that it was badly dishevelled when received, having lost a number of feathers, including two tail feathers; one tail feather and some body feathers, which had become detached, were sent in to him with the bird. In view of the diagnostic importance of the number of tail feathers - White's Thrush has fourteen - it is important that this instability of the tail in the present specimen should be recorded.

On examination I found twelve tail feathers in the mounted bird; it was clear that the two outermost on the right side were missing. The detached tail feather, which I saw, had lost part of the inner web, presumably due to shot: it is certainly the feather next to the outermost on the right. This loose feather is to be reinserted in the tail, so that when finally received by the museum for exhibition there will be thirteen tail feathers present, the right outermost having been lost, probably when the bird was shot. Measurements: bill 29 mm., tarsus 34 mm., wing about 164 mm. It was impossible to obtain a satisfactorily accurate measurement of the latter, as the bird was mounted and drying. Mr. Jamieson informed me that on skinning the bird he found it was very fat.

According to the Handbook, first-winter birds can be distinguished from adults by the yellowish-buff tips to the two central pairs of tail feathers; in the present specimen, though the tips are very slightly lighter than the olive-brown of the rest of feathers, they are certainly not yellowish-buff, so that the bird is probably not in its first winter.

I wish to thank Mr. Davidson, Mr. Roberts and Mr. Jamieson, for their assistance. White's thrush, or "Golden-mountain Thrush" as it is now called in the B.O.U. Check List (1952) has been recorded authentically on four previous occasions in Scotland; these were in Berwickshire (Dec. 1878), at Aberdeen (Oct. 1913), and at Fair Isle twice, in 1929 and 1944, each in October.

Almost all of the more numerous English records and the three Irish ones have also been for the winter months.'

NOT PROVEN

0). c. 1825 Hampshire New Forest, shot, undated.

(Yarrell, 1845; Morris, 1851-57; Wise, 1863; A. Newton, Field 23rd Mar., 1872: 260).

[Yarrell, 1871-74; Kelsall & Munn, 1905].

History Yarrell (1845 (1): 193-194, 2nd ed.) says: 'To Mr. Jesse I am indebted for an introduction to his friend Mr. Bigge of Hampton Court, who has allowed me the use of a specimen of a Thrush which appears to be identical with Dr. Horsfield's Thrush from Java, and also with specimens from Australia, which are certainly very closely allied to the Javanese Thrush. Mr. Bigge's bird is said to have been shot in the New Forest, Hampshire, by one of the forest-keepers, who parted with it to a bird-preserver at Southampton, of whom Mr. Bigge bought it for his own collection. - Mr. Bigge's specimen is eleven inches and a half long; the wing five inches and four-eighths; - the first feather short; the second as long as the sixth; the third, fourth, and fifth of equal length, and the longest in the wing.'

Morris (1852 (3): 190) says: 'Another is said to have been killed in the New Forest in the same county, by one of the Forest keepers, but in the absence of names or dates nothing conclusive can be said about it.'

Wise (1863: 314, 1st ed.) says: 'Two specimens have been obtained: one in the actual Forest shot by a Forest keeper, and which passed into Mr. Bigge's collection.'

Alfred Newton of Magdalen College, Cambridge (1872) in The Field of 23rd Mar., Vol. XXXIX. p. 260, says: 'I am informed that in May, 1849, a case of stuffed birds, containing some 200 specimens, among which was a supposed British-killed example of White's Thrush, was sold by auction at Messrs. Oxenham's rooms. I should be exceedingly obliged to anyone who could tell me what has become of this specimen, which I am very anxious to trace, in the hope of being able to examine it. In return I shall be glad to furnish information respecting its previous history.'

Alfred Newton (1871-74 (1): 256-257, 4th ed.) in Yarrell's British Birds, adds: 'It will be observed that no notice has here been taken of a Thrush mentioned in former editions of this work as being the property of Mr. Bigge, then of Hampton Court, but now of Debden Hall, Essex; who about the year 1825, bought it of a bird-stuffer at Southampton.

This specimen was said to have been shot in the New Forest by one of the keepers. It was unfortunately sold in 1849 with the rest of Mr. Bigge's collection, and that gentleman, though he has most obligingly made every enquiry, has failed to trace it.

It is evident that it was not a White's Thrush, for, as described in former editions of this work, it had the second primary as long as the sixth, a character which equally precludes it, in the Editor's belief from having been an example of Horsfield's Thrush; while he has been very kindly informed by its former possessor that, though he had no reason to doubt the bird-stuffer's story, the specimen, when shown to Mr. Gould, who still remembers the fact, was found by him to have its head stuffed with wool, as was often the case with bird-skins prepared in Australia.

On the whole, therefore, it seems not improbable that though no fraud may have been intended, the specimen had been brought from that country, and is most prudently to be omitted from further consideration.'

Comment Imported. Not acceptable.

0). Pre 1864 Yorkshire Almondbury Bank, obtained, undated.

(A. Beaumont, Huddersfield Naturalist 1864 (1): 217; Eds., Naturalist 1865: 217; Harting, 1872; E. Newman, Zoologist 1874: 4049; Clarke & Roebuck, 1881; W. E. Clarke, Transactions of the Yorkshire Naturalist Union 1884: 68).

[Nelson, 1907; Mather, 1986].

History In an Editorial (1865) in The Naturalist, Vol. I. pp. 215-217, he says: 'Huddersfield Naturalists' Society. The second Exhibition of objects of Natural History held by this Society was opened on Friday evening, October 14th, by the Right Hon. the Earl of Dartmouth....The President exhibited a very fine series of British Birds; the excellency of the stuffing, and the neat uniform appearance of the cases, making them particularly conspicuous; among them was a fine White Tailed Eagle (Falco albicilla) the Pied Flycatcher (Muscicapa atricapilla), recorded in The Naturalist p. 26, a White's Thrush (Turdus whitei) shot at Almondbury Bank, near Huddersfield, a Bee Eater (Merops apiaster) from Cornwall....'

Edward Newman (1874) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IX. p. 4048, in a review of the species admits this record.

Accepted locally (Clarke & Roebuck (1881: 18).

Wm. Eagle Clarke (1884: 68) in the Transactions of the Yorkshire Naturalist Union, says: 'On the 14th October 1864, Mr. Alfred Beaumont, the President, exhibited to the Huddersfield Naturalists' Society, a specimen which he said had been shot at Almondbury Bank. I have endeavoured to obtain further and more detailed information about this bird, but none appears to be attainable.'

Nelson (1907 (1): 13) says: 'There is evidence that an example, said to have been shot at Almondbury Bank, near Huddersfield, in 1864, was not a genuine Yorkshire bird.'

Comment Not known to have been obtained in this country. Not acceptable.

0). 1870 Cleveland/Yorkshire Danby-in-Cleveland, Yorkshire, seen, spring.

(Field 19th Mar., 1870: 244; J. C. Atkinson, Zoologist 1870: 2142; Atkinson; Clarke & Roebuck, 1881; W. E. Clarke, Transactions of the Yorkshire Naturalist Union 1884: 68; Chislett, 1952).

[Harting, 1872; Mather, 1986].

History J. C. Atkinson of Danby-in-Cleveland (1870) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. V. p. 2142, quoting from The Field, says: '...a bird which I have no doubt was a White's Thrush (Turdus whitei).

My attention was drawn to the last named yesterday (Sunday) morning. It was on the grass-plat, not ten yards distant from my study window, and I was enabled almost immediately to examine it thoroughly by the aid of a very excellent double field-glass. I suppose it was thus under observation from two to three minutes. Again, in the afternoon, from the same window, I had a like opportunity of inspection, and as the bird hopped across the grass it came under observation from another window, with nearly equal advantage to the observer. It remained in sight for, I should say, four or five minutes this second time. I had no doubt from the moment I caught sight of it that it was not a common bird, and directly I had it in the field of the glass I recognized the peculiar plumage of the Turdus whitei.

I see Eyton in his Rarer British Birds, speaks of the flight of Lord Malmesbury's bird as "undulating, similar to that of a Misseltoe Thrush".

The remark of my eldest son, who first noticed the bird on the grass-plat, touching the flight of yesterday's bird, was, that it was "just like that of the Missel Thrush"; the spontaneous remark of another observer (quite un-ornithological), who stood by my side at the time, being, as regards its size, that it was so much larger than the common thrush, specimens of which are to be seen on the same grass at almost any time for the trouble of looking out the window.'

Harting (1872: 100) adds: '...a doubtful instance.'

Edward Newman (1874) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IX. pp. 4051-52, in a review of the species says: 'In addition to the species actually "obtained" several others may be mentioned as "seen". Of these there are three good instances.' - [which includes this record.]

Accepted locally (Clarke & Roebuck (1881: 18).

Wm. Eagle Clarke (1884) in the Transactions of the Yorkshire Naturalist Union, p. 68, says: 'This bird has been recorded to have occurred on five occasions in Yorkshire.

One of these is considered to be open to doubt by Mr. Harting in his Handbook of British Birds, namely that mentioned by the Rev. J. C. Atkinson as observed in the spring of 1870, on his lawn at Danby-in-Cleveland, which he examined carefully on two occasions with a binocular glass, and mentioned in The Zoologist (1870: 2142) as this species.

We may, however, agree with Professor Newton in his opinion (Yarrell's British Birds I. p.252) that "this well-known observer is hardly likely to have been mistaken".'

Chislett (1952: 102-103) adds: 'Canon Atkinson gave a detailed report in his Forty Years in a Moorland Parish.'

However, Mather (1986) says: 'It is one of only two of the 33 British records that have occurred outside the period September to January...there is no real evidence on which to evaluate the claim. In my opinion the record is too much out of character, both in temporal and in behavioural terms, to be acceptable; perhaps it was simply a Mistle Thrush, which a large spotted thrush on a lawn in spring is most likely to be.'

Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not aceptable.

0). 1871 Kent Cobham, seen, 5th January.

(Lord Clifton, Zoologist 1871: 2845; J. H. Gurney, Zoologist 1872: 2912-13; Lord Clifton, Zoologist 1872: 2942; E. Newman, Zoologist 1874: 4052; J. H. Gurney, jun., Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society 4: 629; Balston, Shepherd & Bartlett, 1907).

[Harting, 1872; Ticehurst, 1909; Harrison, 1953].

History Lord Clifton (1870) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. V. p. 2845, dated 26th September 1871, says: 'On January 5, 1871, I saw a bird which, on its first rising from some dead leaves in a wood, I mistook for a Woodcock, to which its flight, or the shape of its wings, or both, gave it a marked resemblance.

On my advancing to the spot the bird again rose from some dead leaves further on, and settled in a low tree near me. I then saw that it was of the Thrush family, and resembled the Missel-Thrush in size, though differing so remarkably from that bird in flight and habits. Disturbed from this tree, the bird flew off with the same rapid, low. Woodcock-like flight to another tree, perching on a very low branch, and then dropping down among the dead leaves again, from which, when again flushed, it flew back to its original feeding-ground. I have shot, and shot at, many Woodcocks, and I am quite sure that there are few sportsmen who would not have raised their gun at it as a Woodcock.

My own opinion is that this bird was White's Thrush, but I do not wish to force this opinion upon your readers. I would merely remind them that the Woodcock – like flight and terrestrial habits are among the characteristics noted by Mr. K. F. Tomes in his description of White's Thrush, quoted by Mr. Gould in his magnificent work, The Birds of Great Britain.'

J. H. Gurney (1872) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VII. pp. 2912-13, dated November, 1871, says: 'It is a curious coincidence that two specimens of this rare thrush have been this year (1871) recorded in The Zoologist as occurring on successive days; the first seen in Kent by Lord Clifton on 5th January; the other killed on the 6th of January at Langsford, in Somersetshire, as noted by Mr. Cecil Smith, and I take the liberty of calling attention to this interesting approximation of dates.'

Lord Clifton (1872) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VII. p. 2942, says: 'Mr. Gurney calls attention to the circumstance of two specimens, or supposed specimens, of White's Thrush, occurring on successive days last year, one of which was recorded by myself. An additional coincidence may be noticed in the fact that Mr. R. F. Tomes, as mentioned by Mr. Gould, met with a White's Thrush, a year or two back, on the 5th of January, one of the very days in question. With regard to the editorial remark about the similarity of young Missel Thrushes to this bird, I would observe that it was any peculiarity of plumage that attracted my attention to this bird, but rather the singular resemblance to a Woodcock which it presented on the wing - a peculiarity of this bird which has twice been noticed in The Zoologist. The habits of this bird were altogether distinct from those of the Missel Thrush.'

Harting (1872: 100) says: '...a doubtful instance'.

Edward Newman (1874) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. IX. p. 4052, in a review of the species says: 'In addition to the species actually "obtained" several others may be mentioned as "seen". Of these there are three good instances.' - [which includes this record.]

J. H. Gurney, jun. (1884-89) in the Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society, Vol. IV. p. 629, admitted this record in his list of British occurrences.

Balston, Shepherd & Bartlett (1907: 18) say: 'We have no hesitation in retaining Lord Clifton's record and observations on the occurrence of White's Thrush at Cobham, Kent, and in doing so we have added the comments of Mr. J. H. Gurney and Mr. E. Newman.

There is no reason to doubt that a bird of such powerful flight should not find its way into every part of the country, seeking a suitable situation to establish itself. An odd male or female would travel miles in a very short time searching for a mate, and then leave the country if not successful.

Comment Lord Clifton later became Earl Darnley. Probably misidentified. Not acceptable.

0). 1872 Cleveland/Co. Durham Greatham, Co. Durham, seen, 10th April.

(J. Sclater, Zoologist 1872: 3148, 3186; E. Newman, Zoologist 1874: 4052).

[Temperley, 1951].

History J. Sclater of Castle Eden Dene (1872) in The Zoologist, 2nd series, Vol. VII. p. 3148, dated 5th June, 1872, says: '...Dr. Tristram, of Greatham, tells me he saw a White's Thrush on the 10th of April last; it alighted on a tree close to his house, he was only a few yards from it, and plainly saw the crescentic markings. A pair of Missel Thrushes have nested in the same tree since, and no doubt had chosen it before then for that purpose, and did not like to be intruded upon by a stranger. Dr. Tristram thinks this may have been the mate of the bird obtained on the Dene here.'

However, Temperley (1951: 99-100) only accepted one record for Co. Durham which was in January, 1872.

Comment Probably misidentified. Not acceptable.

0). Pre 1879 Shetland No locality, killed, undated, now at Thurso Museum.

(Lord Clifton, Zoologist 1879: 177).

[KAN].

History Lord Clifton (1879) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. III. p. 177, says: 'As I believe that collectors are occasionally deceived by Thrushes near allied to White's Thrush being sold as that species, it may be interesting to know the whereabouts of some of these specimens.

There is one in Mr. Swaysland's, the well-known bird-stuffer, at Brighton, and two in the Thurso Museum.

One of these latter is labelled "Variety of the Redwing from Shetland"; but there is no good reason to believe it was killed there, foreign birds being mixed indiscriminately with British in the collection. I fancy that all three birds are either Turdus dauma from India or T. lunulatus from Australia. They are darker in colour than the true T. varius, if my eyes did not deceive me; but are at once distinguishable as belonging to that section of the genus Turdus by their large curved beaks and crescentic markings on back and breast. I rather wonder the alleged or mis-labelled Shetland specimen has not been recorded as a British-killed White's Thrush, but I suppose the Thurso Museum has not often been visited by ornithologists.'

Comment Not proven if it was killed in Britain. Not acceptable.

0). 1879 Borders Kelso Bridge, Berwickshire, seen, 19th January.

(A. Brotherston, History of the Berwickshire Naturalists' Club 8: 518; J. E. Harting, Zoologist 1879: 133-134; J. H. Gurney, jun., Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society 4: 629; Evans, 1911).

[KAN].

History Andrew Brotherston (1876-78) in the History of the Berwick Naturalists' Club, Vol. VIII. p. 518, says: 'I believe another bird of the same kind was seen on January 19th [1879], by Mr. A. Steel. It was feeding on a bare sandy spot, under some large willow trees at the south end of Kelso Bridge. He had an excellent view of it before it took flight; and after seeing the remains of the Hardacres specimen, he is convinced it belongs to the same species. Both birds [includes the 1878 Hardacres] were solitary.'

J. E. Harting (1879) in The Zoologist, 3rd series, Vol. III. pp. 133-134, quotes the same story.

J. H. Gurney, jun. (1884-89) in the Transactions of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society, Vol. IV. p. 629, admitted this record in his list of British occurrences but as seen only, as did Evans (1911: 54).

Comment This record has not generally been accepted in the literature of the day. Lacks supporting details. Not acceptable.

0). 1881 Suffolk Moulton, caught by a cat, undated.

(Babington, 1884-86; H. de Mussenden-Leathes, Transactions of the Suffolk Naturalists' Society 1: 235; Ticehurst, 1932; Piotrowski, 2003).

[Tuck, 1911; Lack, 1934].

History Babington (1884-86: 249) says: 'A bird mangled by a cat in 1881 at Moulton, supposed by Mr. Howlett to belong to this species and confirmed at The Field office, to which it was sent; it could not be preserved (Howlett viva voce).'

Locally, Ticehurst (1932: 158) quoting from Babington, adds: '...though not preserved, was satisfactorily identified.'

Major H. de Mussenden-Leathes (1929-31) in the Transactions of the Suffolk Naturalists' Society, Vol. I. p. 235, under Turdus aureus, Hol., in Suffolk, says: 'Have you heard that a specimen of White's Thrush was killed at Ampton in December 1928?' asks Mr. Caton, in litt. last February. We had not and are glad to do so, of the occurrence but not the slaying. It is the first of which we are aware, since the 1881 record by Babington that is ignored in Victoria History.'

Accepted locally (Piotrowski 2003: 253).

Comment Lack (1934: 47) called Howlett notoriously unreliable and rejected all his records for Cambridgeshire. The Victoria County History of Suffolk (Tuck 1911) also left the record out. Not acceptable.

0). Pre 1886 Caithness No locality, obtained, undated.

(Harvie-Brown & Buckley, 1887).

[KAN].

History Harvie-Brown & Buckley (1887: 100) say: 'It is somewhat curious to note that among the very few birds which bear any writing or label, in the collections of Dr. Sinclair, and which are now in the Town Hall at Thurso, there is a White's Thrush which bears the legend "Redwing, rare variety; Caithness", as examined by Mr. E. Bidwell, during a visit paid to Caithness in September 1886. There is no White's Thrush mentioned in either Dr. Sinclair's list, nor in that given by Dr. Wilson, as having been seen by him in Dr. Sinclair's possession.'

Comment Probably not British-killed. No supporting details. Not acceptable.

0). 1893 Hampshire Near Southampton, male, shot, December.

(G. White, Field 24th Feb., 1894: 269).

[Clark & Eyre, 1993].

History G. White of Salisbury (1894) in The Field of 24th Feb., Vol. LXXXIII. p. 269, says: 'I have had brought to me for preservation a specimen of White's Thrush (Turdus whitei), and, being a rarity, I think it worth recording.

It was shot near Southampton in December last by Mr. A. J. L. Hill. It measures just over 12 in. in length. I find the wings differ from the specimen shot by Lord Malmesbury in 1828. The second quill is the longest, the first and third being of equal length. The markings agree with Yarrell's description of Lord Malmesbury's bird. Mr. Hill's bird proved on dissection to be a male.'

Not accepted locally (Clark & Eyre 1993).

Comment Not known to have been seen by a competent authority. No supporting details. Not acceptable.

0). 1893 Lancashire & North Merseyside Near Liverpool, female, obtained, December, now at Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery (Acc. No. 1962Z10.540).

(Watson, 2010).

[White, McCarthy & Jones, 2008].

History Watson (2010) in detailing the J. L. Auden collection in the Birmingham Museum lists a female specimen that was obtained near Liverpool, Lancashire, during December 1893, adding that it was bought at the sale of Sir V. H. Crewe's collection.

Not accepted locally (White, McCarthy & Jones 2008).

Comment Crewe's specimens have been questioned before over their provenance and this record has come to light 117 years after the event leaving it open to doubt. Not acceptable.

0). 1898-99 Cornwall Looe, seen, winter.

(Penhallurick, 1978).

[Not in BOU, 1971].

History Penhallurick (1978: 236) says: 'One seen at Looe during the winter.'

Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.

0). 1901 Devon Torquay, 7th December.

(F. B. Doveton, Field 14th Dec., 1901: 950).

[Moore, 1969].

History F. B. Doveton of Karsfield, Torquay (1901) in The Field of 14th Dec., Vol. XCVIII. p. 950, says: 'I saw a fine specimen of White's Thrush on the 7th ult., about 1.30 p.m., feeding on the berries of an Irish yew close to our dining-room window. The bird was very tame, and I could not be mistaken. Its flight resembled that of a Woodcock, being rather heavy, and it had a white vent.'

Not accepted locally (Moore 1969).

Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.

0). 1903 Cornwall Near Devoran, seen, March.

(Penhallurick, 1978).

[Not in BOU, 1971].

History Penhallurick (1978: 236) says: 'One seen repeatedly by several observers near Devoran in March.'

Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.

0). 1903 Gloucestershire Campden, seen, 19th September.

(Gainsborough, Field 3rd Oct., 1903: 600; Mellersh MS.; Swaine, 1982).

[Swaine, 1982].

History Gainsborough of Campden House, Gloucestershire (1903) in The Field of 3rd Oct., Vol. CII. p. 600, under 'Supposed occurrence of White's Thrush in Gloucestershire', says: 'On Sept. 19 last I saw from my window, not 30 yards from the wall of the house, a strange bird sitting on the branch of a pinsapo tree. It sat very upright, and had the general appearance of a Missel Thrush, but larger, with a longer tail, and much whiter, and with very large, well-defined spots. I judged it to be a White's Thrush.'

Locally, in Mellersh's manuscripts the following entry is recorded: - 'One seen by the Earl of Gainsborough at Campden, 20th September, 1903', while Swaine (1982: 186) states that there appears to be no evidence of identification.

0). 1914 Sussex Brede, adult male, shot, 9th November.

(H. W. Ford-Lindsay, British Birds 8: 199; Walpole-Bond, 1938).

[E. M. Nicholson & I. J. Ferguson-Lees, British Birds 55: 299-384 HR].

History H. W. Ford-Lindsay: (1915) in British Birds, Vol. VIII. p. 199, says: 'On November 10th, 1914, I was shown a specimen of White's Thrush that had been shot the previous day at Brede. Although a good many have been obtained previously in the British Isles, this is only the second record for the county (cf. supra, p. 55).'

Accepted locally (Walpole-Bond 1938 (2): 57).

Comment Hastings rarity. Not acceptable.

0). 1915 Sussex Brede, male, shot, 27th December.

(J. B. Nichols, British Birds 10: 293; W. Ruskin Butterfield, Hastings & East Sussex Naturalist 2: 247; Walpole-Bond, 1938).

[E. M. Nicholson & I. J. Ferguson-Lees, British Birds 55: 299-384 HR].

History J. B. Nichols (1917) in British Birds, Vol. X. p. 293, says: 'I wish to record the following occurrences of White's Thrush (Turdus dauma aureus) in Sussex. (1) A male shot at Brede on December 27, 1915. Examined in the flesh by Mr. Ford Lindsay....There was one shot at Brede on November 9, 1914, as already recorded (Brit. Birds, Vol. VIII. p. 199). That was a male also. Altogether these seem to make four recorded Sussex specimens.'

Accepted locally (Walpole-Bond 1938 (2): 57).

Comment Hastings rarity. Not acceptable.

0). 1916 Sussex Near St Leonards-on-Sea, male, shot, 26th February, now at Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery (Acc. No. 1962Z10.541).

(J. B. Nichols, British Birds 10: 293; W. Ruskin Butterfield, Hastings & East Sussex Naturalist 2: 247; Walpole-Bond, 1938; Watson, 2010).

[E. M. Nicholson & I. J. Ferguson-Lees, British Birds 55: 299-384 HR].

History J. B. Nichols (1917) in British Birds, Vol. X. p. 293, says: 'I wish to record the following occurrences of White's Thrush (Turdus dauma aureus) in Sussex....(2) A male shot at St. Leonards on February 28, 1910. Examined in the flesh by Mr. W. Ruskin Butterfield....Altogether these seem to make four recorded Sussex specimens.'

Accepted locally (Walpole-Bond 1938 (2): 57).

Watson (2010) in detailing the J. L. Auden collection in the Birmingham Museum lists a male specimen that was obtained at St Leonards, Sussex, on 26th February 1916, adding that it was bought at the sale of J. B. Nichols collection, who had bought it from G. Bristow on 11th March 1915.

Comment Hastings rarity. Not acceptable.

0). 1919 Sussex No locality, seen, undated.

(Anon., Bird Notes and News 8: 59).

[KAN].

History Anon. (1919) in Bird Notes and News, Vol. VIII. p. 59, says: 'A correspondent in East Sussex, a naturalist of long experience, writes to chronicle the presence of a White's Thrush, seen on his own land: "I had so good a view that there was no mistake about the species, as so often happens when only a momentary glance is obtained".

This species was first recorded for England at Christchurch. Hampshire, where one was shot by Lord Malmesbury in 1828, and was named in honour of Gilbert White. It is considerably larger than the Throstle, being 12 in. in length, and the boldly mottled plumage also distinguishes it.'

Comment Anonymous records were unacceptable to ornithologists. Not acceptable.

0). 1924 Sussex Kemp Town, Brighton, seen, January.

(Walpole-Bond, 1938).

[Walpole-Bond, 1938].

History Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 58) says: 'The next six notices, from being sight records, cannot claim complete credence. But, of course, all may be quite correct...1924. During January a specimen was seen in a garden at Kemp Town, Brighton, by Mr. J. Steadman (R. J. Messent, in litt. to Dr. B. Mends).'

Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.

0). 1927 Sussex Hurstpierpoint, seen, 10th February.

(The Times 15th Feb., 1927; Walpole-Bond, 1938).

[Walpole-Bond, 1938].

History Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 58) says: 'The next six notices, from being sight records, cannot claim complete credence. But, of course, all may be quite correct, and in this connection I, personally, have little doubt about the bird of 1927....On February 10th one was observed by Mr. M. Woodward (Times, 15/ii/1927) at Hurstpierpoint.'

Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.

0). 1929 Sussex Victoria Gardens, Brighton, seen, November.

(Walpole-Bond, 1938).

[Walpole-Bond, 1938].

History Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 58) says: 'The next six notices, from being sight records, cannot claim complete credence. But, of course, all may be quite correct...1929. Mr. J. Steadman was told "on good authority" that an example was present during November in Victoria Gardens, Brighton (R. J. Messent, in litt. to Dr. B. Mends).

Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.

0). 1930 Sussex Alnwick, seen, October.

(Walpole-Bond, 1938).

[Walpole-Bond, 1938].

History Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 58) says: 'The next six notices, from being sight records, cannot claim complete credence. But, of course, all may be quite correct...1930. Several times during October a bird was observed at Alnwick by Mr. W. H. B. Fletcher (S. Morris in litt.).

Comment Not acceptable. There is an Aldwick, Bognor.

0). 1931 Sussex West Wittering, seen, mid-October to early January 1932.

(Walpole-Bond, 1938).

[Walpole-Bond, 1938].

History Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 58) says: 'The next six notices, from being sight records, cannot claim complete credence. But, of course, all may be quite correct...1931-32. Between about the middle of October and (?) early January, inclusive, one frequented Dr. B. Mend's garden at West Wittering (S. Morris in litt.).

Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.

0). 1932 Sussex Queen's Park, Brighton, seen, late November.

(G. C. Low, Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club 53: 78).

[KAN].

History G. Carmichael Low, Editor (1932) in the Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club, Vol. LIII. p. 78, at the 359th Meeting of the Club held on 14th December 1932 at Pagani's Restaurant, London, says: 'Mr. Griffith [A. F. Griffith] further said that just three weeks ago he saw a White's Thrush (Oreocincla dauma aureus) in Queen's Park, one of the public gardens in Brighton. He first saw it on the ground, and it let him get within ten yards of it before it flew up into the lowest branch of a small tree a few yards further off. Then it flew close past him and away to another part of the gardens, and he lost sight of it. On each occasion it flew so near the ground that he could not see the underside of its wings, but it was so close to him that the identification was quite certain. Its flight was even more wavy than any of its congeners.

Comment Strange how Walpole-Bond missed this record. No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.

0). 1934 Sussex Hastings, seen, 25th September.

(A. E. Moon, South-Eastern Bird Report 1934: 43; Walpole-Bond, 1938).

[KAN].

History A. E. Moon (1934) in the South-Eastern Bird Report, p. 43, says: 'On September 25th one was seen at John's Place in Hastings. It was watched at close range and the distinguishing features were easily discernible (A.E.M.).'

Walpole-Bond (1938 (2): 58) says: 'The next six notices, from being sight records, cannot claim complete credence. But, of course, all may be quite correct...1934. "On September 25th one was seen at John's Place in Hastings. It was watched at close range and the distinguishing features were easily discernible".'

Comment No identification details for this sight record of a difficult species. Not acceptable.

0). 1935 Derbyshire Priestcliffe, Taddington, seen, 14th September.

(G. N. Carter, Field 25th Jan., 1936: 189; Derbyshire Archaeological and Natural History Society Journal 1936; Eds., British Birds 31: 95-96).

[Frost, 1978].

History G. N. Carter (1936) in The Field of 25th Jan., Vol. CLXVII. p. 189, says: 'I have pleasure in recording that when shooting in the Peak District of Derbyshire on September 14th, 1935, I moved a White's Thrush out of some potatoes at about 12.30 p.m. and again at 4.30 p.m. The undulating flight, the almost vertical manner in which it rose to alight at nearly the top of an ash tree, and the beautiful white patches on its tail feathers were unmistakeable. There were hundreds of Song and Missel Thrushes about on that day.

I went again on September 21st in the faint hope that it might have remained at the same spot, but my distinguished visitor had departed, as had also all the other thrushes.'

In an Editorial (1937) in British Birds, Vol. XXXI. p. 96, in a Review of the 'Ornithological Record for Derbyshire', 1935-6, in the Derbyshire Arch., and Nat. Hist. Soc. Journal, 1936, they say: 'A bird seen near Taddington on September 14th, 1935, was considered to be a White's Thrush.'

Not accepted locally (Frost 1978).

0). 1936 Hampshire No locality, seen, 1st May.

(C. E. Harvard, Field 23rd May 1936: 1246).

[Clark & Eyre, 1993].

History C. E. Harvard of Cookham Dean, Berks. (1936) in The Field of 23rd May Vol. CLXVII. p. 1246, says: 'Though unusually shy of rushing into print, I think perhaps it should be recorded that a White's Thrush was seen on May 1st by me, very tame, and viewed for several minutes at close quarters. The district was in Hampshire.'

Not accepted locally (Clark & Eyre 1993).

Comment Most probably misidentified. Not acceptable.

0). 1936 Northumberland Hexham, 22nd October.

(G. W. Temperley, Vasculum 23: 45).

[Galloway & Meek, 1978-83; Kerr, 2001].

History Not accepted locally (Galloway & Meek 1978-83).

Comment The Vasculum is an increbly hard journal to find.

0). 1946 Berkshire Near Wantage, seen, 2nd December.

(K. Price, Report of the Oxford Ornithological Society on the Birds of Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire 1946: 14-15).

[K. Price, Report of the Oxford Ornithological Society on the Birds of Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire 1946: 14-15].

History K. Price (1946) in the Report of the Oxford Ornithological Society on the Birds of Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Buckinghamshire, pp. 14-15, recording the record in square-brackets, says: 'A bird which the observer is confident was a White's Thrush was seen by B.M.A.C. near Wantage on Dec. 2. It flew up from some corn stubble in company with Starlings and Song Thrushes and perched, facing the observer, in a hawthorn bush. He had quite a good view of it, but it was very timid and when he stopped his car in order to use binoculars it flew off towards a wood. The following particulars are based on pencilled notes taken at the time.

The bird appeared larger than a Mistle Thrush and the blackish markings on the whitish-buff breast were of a half-moon shape, small beneath the neck and becoming larger on the belly. It showed white on the throat and beneath the tail. As it turned when it flew away it was seen that the light brown plumage on the back had crescent-shaped markings similar to those on the under-parts.

The flight was undulating like a Mistle Thrushes, but the action struck the observer as wagtail-like. It appeared to agree closely with the description and illustration of White's Thrush in The Handbook and with a mounted specimen in the University Museum.'

0). 1952 Northumberland Foulmartlaw, Belsay, two, 26th April.

(G. W. Temperley, Transactions of the Northumberland, Durham & Newcastle-upon-Tyne Natural History Society 10: 140; Galloway & Meek, 1978-83).

[Not in BOU, 1971; D. I. M. Wallace, C. Bradshaw & M. J. Rogers, British Birds 99: 463].

History G. W. Temperley (1952) in the Transactions of the Northumberland, Durham & Newcastle-upon-Tyne Natural History Society, Vol. X. p. 140, says: 'On April 26th at 5.30 p.m. a couple of White's Thrushes alighted upon a low wall in front of the windows of Foulmartlaw, Belsay, N.

The owner, Mr. L. E. H. Hyde-Clarke, and his nephew, Mr. Maurice Lacy, of Ampton Hall, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, watched the birds with binoculars from a window c. 20 yards away for fully ten minutes, before they left the wall-top to feed in the field. The birds sat on the wall very quietly as though exhausted. Mr. Lacy is very familiar with White's Thrush, as on December 3rd, 1928, one was shot on the Ampton Hall estate and is in his own possession. (See B. B. Vol. XXII. p. 330).

On the following day a search was made in the neighbourhood of Foulmartlaw by A.A. and G.W.T. but the birds were not seen again. The only previous record for Northumberland was a bird seen by Miss E. L. Turner on November 2nd, 1914, on Holy Island. There is also one record for County Durham; a bird shot at Castle Eden Dene on January 17th, 1872, and now in the Hancock Museum.'

Galloway & Meek (1978-83) state that at Foulmartlaw, Belsay, two were together on 26th April 1952.

D. I. M. Wallace, C. Bradshaw & M. J. Rogers (2006) in British Birds, Vol. XCIX. p. 463, in a review of certain rarities during the period 1950-57, found this record to be unacceptable.

AC pass

Keith Naylor

White's Thrush

Zoothera aurea (Holandre, 1825) (24, 2)

Grey-cheeked Thrush

Siberian Thrush