444 THE ZOOLOGIST. 
There was also, for many years, a Rookery in the trees in the churchyard 
of St. Dunstan’s in the East, a short distance from the Tower; the Rooks 
for some years past deserted that spot, owing, it is believed, to the fire that 
occurred a few years ago at the old Custom House. But the present spring, 
1827, they have begun again to build on those trees, which are not elm, 
but a species of plane. There was also, formerly, a Rookery on some large 
elm trees in the College Garden behind the Ecclesiastical Court in Doctors’ 
Commons, a curious anecdote concerning which has been recorded.” 
Here follows a reference to the story given by Hone, and already 
quoted by Dr. Hamilton. 
I may perhaps be also excused for quoting a paragraph from 
the ‘ Field Naturalist’ for 1833 (vol. i., pp. 88, 89), wherein is con- 
tained the following extract from a child’s book : *— 
“Some years since a small colony of Rooks, probably a detachment 
from that which had long occupied the trees in St. Dunstan’s churchyard, 
took possession of some lofty elm trees on the parade in the Tower, which 
they soon filled with their nests; and the shortness of accommodation 
there, perhaps, led some of them to occupy the crowns, which are fixed on 
the top of the vaues at each turret of the. White Tower. The remains of 
the nests may still be seen filling these singular stations.” 
Finally, while on the subject of Rooks, I may be allowed to say 
that since the publication of my history of the species in the 
revised edition of Yarrell’s ‘ British Birds,’ I have been favoured 
by Lady Stuart-Menteth with a copy of the pamphlet ‘ Farmers 
versus Rooks,’ mentioned by Yarrell, which, notwithstanding search 
made in many quarters, [ had been unable to see. It is in the form 
of a report of a trial “supposed to have taken place in Ayrshire, 
before a committee of gentlemen, appointed by the Agricultural 
Society of that county, to consider the supposed damage done by 
Rooks to their tenantry,” aud was printed at Ayr in 1838. There 
is now no novelty in the statements adduced on either side, what- 
ever there may have been then; but the author, Mr. (subsequently 
Sir James) Stuart Menteath, skilfully marshalled a long array of 
witnesses on behalf of his clients, though the jury returned a 
verdict of guilty. 
+ ‘Sketches of Birds,’ &c. By S. Roper. 12mo. Harvey & Darten, London, 1832, 
