EDITOR'S CORNER. 



151 



tributed widely among farmers and 

 sportsmen in that State, and in which he 

 makes this statement: 



I am asked by many people: Do game birds', 

 such as quails and prairie chickens, eat bugs and 

 worms? From an observation extending over a 

 great many years, I will say no. In the year 1877 

 when the grasshoppers were so thick in Nebraska 

 I was out there with a hunting party. At times 

 you could not see the sun for the grasshoppers. 

 Prairie chickens were plentiful and you could kill 

 all you wanted around Firth, Nebraska, till the 

 grasshoppers showed up. To show you how 

 much they liked grasshoppers or bugs, they left 

 that country, and when we wanted to find chick- 

 ens we had to go where there were no grasshop- 

 pers. I have watched the habits of game closely. 

 I have never found a bug or a worm in the craw 

 of a quail or a prairie chicken. They live on 

 wheat and seeds such as are raised in the fields. 

 I have had a great many gentlemen investigate 

 this question and they found I was right. Be- 

 cause a bird will eat a bug or a worm in the cage 

 is no sign it will eat it when turned loose in the 

 field. No, it will scratch for seeds and live on 

 such. 



Mr. Erb is a conscientious and indus- 

 trious worker in the cause of game and 

 song bird protection, and would not will- 

 fully misstate any fact, or give any wrong 

 information regarding the habits of any 

 bird, but his observations or the reports 

 of those of other people have led him into 

 a serious error, as is shown by the follow- 

 ing letter from Dr. T. S. Palmer, Chief of 

 the Biographical Bureau of the Agricul- 

 tural Department: 



As to Mr. Erb's statement that quails, 

 prairie chickens, and robins do not eat 

 insects, this, simply indicates that Mr. 

 Erb's conclusions have been based on in- 

 sufficient data. The young of all these 

 birds are fed almost entirely on insects. 

 In fact, the stomachs of 2 young prairie 

 chickens which we have examined show 

 nothing else. Doubtless you recollect the 

 case mentioned by Samuels, of a farmer's 

 boy in Ohio, who, on observing a flock of 

 quails in his father's cornfield, supposed 

 the birds were pulling up corn and killed 

 one of them. Examination of the crow 

 revealed the presence of one cutworm, 

 21 striped vine bugs, and 100 chinch bugs, 

 but no corn. Among the robins' stomachs 

 examined by Professor Beal I find 3, 

 selected at random, which furnish fair 

 evidence of the birds' work as insect 

 destroyers. One stomach, taken at 

 Beaver, Pa v March 29, 1892, contained 

 98 per cent of animal matter, nearly all 

 insect remains, and comprising mainly 

 beetles, grasshoppers, and crickets. An- 

 other stomach, collected August 9, 1898, 

 at Bozeman, Mont., contained nothing but 

 insect matter, all grasshoppers, with the 

 exception of a few eggs of the katydid. 

 A third stomach, collected July 21, 1893, 

 at Onaga, Kas., shows nothing but insect 

 remains, 84 per cent of which were of 

 crickets and grasshoppers. Of course, 



all these birds take vegetable food, such 

 as fruit or grain, at certain seasons of the 

 year, when it is abundant, and it probably 

 happened that Mr. Erb's observations 

 were made at such times. 



ANOTHER SETBACK FOR THE GAME 



DEALERS. 



From the Portland Oregonian. 



Game brought into Oregon is amenable 

 to the law of the State, no matter where 

 or when killed, and although trout may 

 have been legally caught in the State of 

 Washington, they can not be brought into 

 Oregon and sold in the ppen market when 

 the season is closed here. That was the 

 gist of a decision rendered this morning 

 by Judge Bellinger in the Federal Court, 

 and is important because by its terms the 

 State has entire control over all fish and 

 game brought within its borders. The case 

 was brought into court on a writ of habeas 

 corpus sued out by W. W. Deininger, 

 Manager of the Chlopeck Fish Company, 

 who was arrested and fined $35 for selling 

 in the open markets of Portland trout 

 which were caught in Washington. The 

 contention of the defense was that the 

 trout having been lawfully caught it would 

 be interfering with interstate commerce 

 to restrain their sale here. Judge Bel- 

 linger quoted from a Connecticut decision, 

 in which it was held that the State could 

 make and enforce such laws. "The de- 

 cision is based on the fundamental prin- 

 ciple," said Judge Bellinger, "of the com- 

 plete ownership of many things, such as 

 real estate, and the qualified ownership of 

 birds and fish. There is no rule by which 

 we can distinguish between bringing game 

 into the State or taking it out. The ulti- 

 mate object sought in this case, is the sale 

 of the fish and the law has the legitimate 

 right to stop this. The taking of fish is 

 not an industry. The right of Oregon to 

 prohibit the selling of game at certain 

 times does not depend on the laws of an- 

 other State. When the game is brought 

 here from another State it becomes the 

 game of this State, and is under the au- 

 thority of the officers. The petition for a 

 writ of habeas corpus will therefore be 

 denied." 



Here is another sad blow for the game 

 dealers. Truly, they have a rough road to 

 travel, and the sooner they all decide to 

 abandon it and get on an easy trail, the 

 better it will be for them. — Editor. 



AN UNWISE EDITOR. 



A. J. Von Schaick, editor of the Fort 

 Ann, N. Y., Republic, is busy defending 

 the fish pirates who are trying to clean 

 out Lake Champlain. In a personal letter 

 to a lady who lives in Whitehall, N. Y , 

 the editor says: 



