Econofnic Ornithology. 



211 



But the Kangaroo, seeing no one in front 

 -of him, turned sharply around, took in the 

 situation in an instant, and with a dexterity 

 iDorn of constant practice in leapfrog, 

 adroitly avoided the well-meant kick. 



The instant Charley touched the ground 

 the Kangaroo was over him, and lashing 

 out viciously as he swept through the air 

 brought his tail down on Charley's cheek 

 with a force that made him reel and fall 

 "backward. As he looked up he saw a 

 dozen Kangaroos in mid-air clearing the 

 hedge. "He is down!" they exclaimed in 

 chorus. The old man turned on him with 

 a face white with rage. Charley struggled 



to rise — in vain. A moan escaped him, and 

 in that moment of terror he heard his name 

 uttered in the tender and pathetic accents 

 of his mother's voice, threw out his arms 

 toward her, and the next instant awoke 

 trembling in her fond embrace. 



"Oh mother," said he, "how fortunate 

 you came just at that minute; if you had 

 been only a quarter of a minute later, I 

 should have been torn to pieces." 



"I tell you what it is," said his father 

 later in the day when he heard of it, " if 

 that boy has any more dreams like that, 

 you'll have to give him a smart dose of 

 physic." 



ECONOMIC ORNITHOLOGY. 



THE special Division of the Agricul- 

 tural Department at Washington, 

 under Dr. C. Hart Merriam, has issued its 

 preliminary report on economic ornithology, 

 giving the general result of its investiga- 

 tions to date. 



The protection of hawks and owls is 

 urged in the strongest terms, on the plea 

 already familiar to readers of the Audu- 

 bon, that although these birds feast occa- 

 sionally on chicken, they subsist on mice, 

 beetles, grasshoppers, etc., benefiting the 

 farmer to such an extent that their occa- 

 sional depredations in the poultry yard are 

 insignificant in comparison. 



The English sparrow comes in for the 

 most unqualified condemnation, but it oc- 

 curs to us that the investigation does not 

 appear to have been conducted in the same 

 scientifically impartial spirit that resulted 

 in the acquittal of the hawks and owls. 

 The Department has called for facts and 

 opinions as to the merits and demerits of 

 this impudent little settler, and is in posses- 

 sion of a mass of replies, amounting, it is 

 said, to four hundred printed pages, all 

 condemnatory, but when it is remembered 

 that only twelve months ago it would have 

 been easy to collect as general and violent 



a condemnation of hawks and owls, the 

 condemnation of the sparrow appears pre- 

 mature. On the same grounds we are dis- 

 posed to take exception to the sweeping 

 conclusion that all birds subsisting on grain 

 are inimical to man, those only being bene- 

 ficial which prey on mice and insects. 



These conclusions suggest the view that 

 if we could only get rid of the mice and 

 insects, we could well afford to spare the 

 birds, but Charles Darwin's investigations 

 into the life labors of the earthworm points 

 to widely different conclusions, and open up 

 a new field for investigation. 



The conclusion that hawks and owls were 

 the farmer's worst enemies was reached by 

 drawing general conclusions from isolated 

 facts, while a fuller knowledge of the life 

 habits of these birds has presented them 

 in quite another aspect; and as granivor- 

 ous birds can prey on the crops only at 

 certain restricted periods, we must ascer- 

 tain the economic importance of their habits 

 at other seasons before it will be safe to 

 reach conclusions. 



The whole subject is one of the greatest 

 interest, but want of space compels us to 

 postpone further reference to it in this 

 issue. 



