EVIDENCE. PUBLISHED TESTIMONY. 303 



inally introduced from Europe, has been of late a source of constant 

 anxiety and apprehension. For the last decade or more the newspapers 

 have been filled with complaints of injury and petitions for restrictive 

 legislation, but no important works on the subject have been published. 

 One of the latest contributions to the history of the bird in Australia 

 is the Draft Progress Report of the Board of Investigation, appointed 

 by the governor of South Australia in 1881, which has been quoted 

 nearly entire in the following section of this Bulletin. (See page 348.) 



In America the condition of affairs has been similar, except that no 

 official commissions have been appointed to investigate the subject, and 

 most of the published material on the Sparrow belongs to what may be 

 called fugitive literature. Only two works devoted entirely to the Spar- 

 rowhavebeenpublishedinthe United States, oueinlSTS, by T.G. Gentry, 

 entitled The House Sparrow at Rome and Abroad; the other in 1879 by 

 Dr. Elliot Coues, entitled On the Present Status of Passer domesticus in 

 America, with Sjjecial Reference to the Western States and Territories. 

 Both these works contain lists of papers relating to the subject, the 

 bulletin by Dr. Coues consisting almost entirely of such a list, covering 

 the period from 1867 to 1879, and giving the titles of one hundred and 

 ninety papers, mainly from newspapers and other periodicals. 



Dr. Pickering's warning against the Sparrow, uttered in 1867, has 

 been alluded to already ; but, although the first, this was not the only 

 expression of apprehension. In a paper published in the American 

 Naturalist for August, 1872, Mr. H. J. Bruce describes the habits of the 

 Indian House Sparrow (Passer indicus), and after stating that Dr. Jer- 

 don pronounces this bird one of the greatest pests of India, alludes to 

 the introduction into the United States of the nearly allied European 

 House Sparrow (P. domesticus) in the following words: 



I confess that I look with somo apprehension upon these efforts, which I believe to be 

 ill-advised and inexpedient. The European House Sparrow does not differ essentially 

 in its habits from its Indian ally, and, so far as I can learn," it is very generally re-, 

 garded as a nuisance wherever it abounds. In some parts of England a bounty is 

 placed upon its head, and considerable sums of money are paid for its destruction. 



If the Sparrow is to be introduced into America to devour the larvae of insects, it 

 should be remembered that it is for the most part a feeder on grain, seeds, and buds, 

 and that it only makes a business of devouring grubs during its breeding season. * 

 * I trust that those who have to do in this matter will act advisedly, lest they 

 should introduce that which will eventually become as great a nuisance'in its way as 

 the curculio and the canker-worm. (American Naturalist, Yl, 1872, pp. 468-470.) 



In 1871 Dr. T. M. Brewer, of Boston, Mass., took up arms in defense 

 of the Sparrow by replying to an article by Dr. Coues in the American 

 Naturalist, reflecting on the bird, and daring the four or five years fol- 

 lowing a lively controversy was carried on in this journal and the news- 

 papers, by these two naturalists, re-enforced from time to time by various 

 others. 



In 1878 the Nuttall Ornithological Club, of Cambridge, Mass., de- 



