(464) male (not to overstate the matter) as in no way shirking his share of all labor in connection with rearing a brood, from the placing of the first twig to the final driving off of the young. (What about his grabbing the new nest to sleep in?) Up to date, the notes show, in the matter of song that he has shown greater fertility in mimicry. As to the rest--it will be nec- essary to go back and check up. However, it is only fair to say that I have been several times during the past few days, on the point of then recording my opinion that the supposed female (Brownie) was the better singer of the two. Believing that Brownie was the female, I hesitated have been through what, in retrospect, now appears to be excess of caution. However, I will not commit myself on this point as yet. Nest now seen as part of reproductive programme. The act of copulation makes it appear as if the present nest were intended to be a part of a reproductive programme and that the reproductive organs of the pair are in proper condition to bring about a successful result. (I do not know whether this is biologically sound or not). It should have been noted that after Greenie came to me following copulation, she looked up into the nest tree as if about to go up in it--an unusual action for this bird at roosting time. October 13th. No early song. No early morning singing was heard. G. on nest. At 8:00 A.M. Greenie was sitting quietly in the nestx Her identity was indirectly verified by getting Brownie to come to me in the glade. B. sings. After eating, Brownie went to the top of the old oak and sang intermitt- tently for a long time. Dr. Reynolds called me down to the street to watch the evolutions of two flickers, apparently courting. At G. still 8:16 Greenie was still in the nest and Brownie was on its edge, reach- ing over occasionally to touch Greenie on the bill. We left them thus occupied. In a few minutes, Brownie reappeared at the old oak and sang. About 8:35 two birds dived down from the tree and it was