AMERICAN INSTITUTE. 91 



the oak, which is protlueed by an insect. Only some species of oaks pro- 

 duce trufHcs, difficult to say which. One sign is, that the ground all about 

 the truffle oak, is entirely free of all vegetation ; and when the truffles be- 

 gin to be produced, every trace of grass disappears. 



A. Bergen. — I wish the members of the club would 'talk more about 

 birds — for instance what can be said about crows, and whether we should 

 make war upon all birds. T try to preserve them on my farm, for I am 

 particularly fond of their sweet singing — the little wren for instance — but 

 I don't like crows ; they pull our corn, and do, other mischief. 



Prof. Nash. — I believe we should make friends with all birds. I will 

 not except even crows. We have made war upon birds until we have 

 fewer than any of the European countries. Even the robin has been 

 attacked as a noxious bird because it eats a few cherries, and yet the robin 

 lives upon curculio. 



The chairman stated that the supervisors of counties in this State have 

 the right to enact laws to prevent the killing of birds. I like birds, but 

 I fail to see the value of the crow. As to his eating carrion, that T don't 

 think much in his favor. Tarring the seed will prevent the crows from 

 pulling corn. I have known small birds to do a good deal of harm, but I 

 would not exterminate them. 



Mr. Meigs. — Jersey not merely makes law, but in all important cases 

 executes it, and does so with this bird law. 



THE NUISANCE OF DOGS. 



Wm. Lawton. — The crow is a very timid bird, and is easily kept out of 

 mischief by scarecrows or by feeding them with sowed corn. We have 

 another nuisance much greater than all the birds. I allude to dogs, the 

 most worthless of all animals, and most noxious, too, to our best interests. 

 They entirely prevent the raising of sheep in Westchester county, and 

 give nothing in return ; and I don't see how a Christian man can intrude 

 a great uncouth dog into a neighbor's house. I have no objection to a 

 shepherd having a dog if it is useful to him, or a pet bear or tiger ; but of 

 what use are the ordinary curs ? I estimate that it cotts the State of 

 New York three millions of dollars to maintain the dogs, besides the life 

 that is lost from the bites of rabid ones. 



Prof. Nash. — I must approve all that is said in favor of birds and 

 against the worthless, misehievous dogs. I have just heard of a loss of 

 $200 worth of sheep in Amherst, Mass. ; but I must say there is one 

 greater nuisance than dogs — it is the men with guus, vidio infest the whole 

 country, destroying all the birds. I doubt whether man can ever destroy the 

 insects that effect destruction of crops. There is a law of natiire that 

 provides a balance in all natural things, and if we would not be eaten up 

 by insects, we must protect the birds ; and if we would raise sheep and 

 furnish cheaper food for the poor, we must make war upon the dogs to 

 the point of extermination. Not the tenth part of the sheep are kept in 

 Berkshire county, that would be kept but for dogs, as I was informed 



