668 _ ENGLISH SPARROWS. 
house sparrow. He accuses the latter of entertaining feelings of 
prejudice against the sparrows, and of being ‘‘ apparently only too 
glad to condemn them on the scantiest evidence.’ 
After a careful perusal of what Dr. Coues has written, I must 
confess that I am utterly unable to see how such a construction as 
Dr. Brewer’s could be forced upon it. In the article to which ref 
erence has been made, Dr. Coues says, “I have always been op- 
posed to the introduction of the birds, mainly on this score, also 
for other reasons.” What the other reasons are, it is not my 
province to divine; but it is sufficiently obvious from a clause of 
the above quotation, that his opposition to them was not founded 
upon imaginary wrongs which he supposed they would commit, but 
upon. knowledge either gained by personal observation or that had 
been communicated to him by others. He was undoubtedly in 
possession of evidence similar to mine, at the date of the latter’s 
reception. 
By referring to page 146 of the ‘Key,’ I find that he mani- . 
fested considerable concern about the results which would a 
dently follow the overflowing of municipal limits by the species, 
when the latter should come in contact with our native birds. 
Here it is difficult to resist the conclusion, that the knowledge 
which he possessed at the time of writing the “Key,” afforded a 
sufficient warrant for what he said, and furnished the ground for 
his anxiety. Dr. Coues is too careful an observer and recorder 
of facts to pen an article without having taken the precaution to 
intrench himself securely against assault. From the evidence 
submitted it is clear that the charge of prejudice which has been 
preferred against him, is not sustained. 
Leaving the learned doctor to defend himself, in his own able 
manner, which I am assured he will not hesitate to do, . regard 
for my own feeble reputation, compels me to pen a few lines de- 
nunciatory of the charge of misrepresentation which Dr. Brewer 
has imputed to me, as implied in his review. The Doctor says 
in language not to be miscomprehended, that he « entirely ue 
credits” my statement, assigning as the reason, that he does 
believe that “ the habits of either the house sparrow, or the agate 
blue bird, or the native sparrows, are different in Pennsy Įvams 
from what they are in Massachusetts.” What I see with of 
natural eye is evidence of belief. I am not prone to 4 — 
“double vision,” but generally observe things as they really ex1 
