acquire a taste for beef, and cause hideous sores which are difficult to

treat.”


Another interesting p issage is also found with reference

to the power of vision in a J ickdaw ; these anecdotes with their

lessons form one of the greatest charms of the book. In this

case we cannot quite agree with the author ; but that is not to

the point, and, were it not for want of space, would like to quote

the passage. What we wish to point out is, that these little

stories, apart from being interesting to the casual reader, compel

him, in spite of himself, to question their accuracy and to

experiment on his own account, adding a fiesh interest to his

private study of birds and, let us hope, not without profit to

ornithologists in general.


The question of the Hooded and Black Crows being

distindt species or not, is well and clearly discussed and worthy

of attention. There are also some interesting and at the same

time astounding notes on the migration of the Hooded Crow.

Throughout the two articles on these birds nothing but invectives

is hurled at them. That they do a certain amount of damage

cannot be denied, but we strongly deny that the damage is as

great as is frequently supposed. To cite one instance : we have

found a nest of young Hoodies in a wood in Norway which was

at the same time filled with Bramblings, Fieldfares, Redpolls,

etc., yet few, if any, of these nests were without their full

complement of eggs or young. The balance of nature is so

adjusted that it requires no help from man ; it is only where man

wishes to rear great numbers of Pheasants, or to beautify his

woods by lopping the trees, that Crows and Hawks get their

food, so to speak, thrown at them, and are then blamed for

trying to re-establish the balance which man has upset.


In the article on the Rook there is a pretty quotation in

defence of the Crow, looked at from the sentimental point of

view. This is another side of the question, which will, we trust,

serve to soften the vindidtiveuess of the preceding articles. No

mention is made with regard to the loss of feathers round the

base of the bill ; as several interesting discussions have been

held on the subject, some notice ought to have been taken. The

question of the Rooks’ service, or reverse, to farmers, is neatly

summed up in the following words : —


“ In England the Rook is a useful bird as long as it cau obtain a

sufficient quantity of insects and their larvae to support it and its offspring;

but when, owing to protracted drought, it cannot obtain these, it becomes

somewhat mischievous after the fashion of its congeners.”



