Hawk and Sparrow. 331 



longer time than most of his brethren of less notoriety. 

 For all the great gormandizing that he has done, or 

 has been supposed to do, he is never represented with 

 that rotundity consequent on an overloaded stomach, 

 neither does the conformation of the body, stomach, 

 or intestines, admit of such." 



A plea has been sometimes urged in behalf of birds 

 of prey that, instead of being injurious to game, such 

 as grouse, they may do a real service by killing off 

 sickly birds, which might otherwise spread infection. 

 Robertson was well enough disposed to accept any 

 sound argument that might save the life of some fine 

 falcon, but this particular plea he did not consider 

 sound. No reason, he said, had been given for be- 

 lieving that hawks would especially single out the 

 diseased birds. The most that could be said was 

 that they would probably take whatever they first 

 came across, and if we argued, not from facts but 

 from possibilities, the chances were that the sickly 

 ones would seek shelter and concealment and be 

 less exposed to the devouring beaks of their enemies 

 than the more healthy and active members of the 

 race. 



In the controversy respecting sparrows, without 

 attempting to decide whether they do more good than 

 harm or more harm than good to our crops, Robertson 

 has remarked that one point which deserves to be 

 borne in mind is usually neglected, namely, that there 

 are means at man's disposal for scaring sparrows away, 

 whereas shouts and scarecrows and the noise of guns 

 have no effect whatever on the nerves of a caterpillar. 



The instances that have been given will suffice to 



