Sepi'. i. 1903.] THE TROPICAL 
remarks, as I have had the opportunity of observing 
tnd studying the habits ot birds in various parts of 
he Island for many years. To begin with, in your 
article it is stated that the disappearance of birds had 
been brought about gradually with the opening up o£ 
the country for cofiee, but that more recently, with 
the felling of immecse tracts of forest for tea- 
growing a complete change had taken place, etc., 
etc. Mr Fraser tries to show that this is not so by 
saying that ' 99 per cent of our tea was formerly in 
coffee.' Truly a remaikable statemenf ! I will quote 
from 'Ferguson's Handbook and Directory': 1878 
(when the coffee acreage was ot its height) acreage 
planted or opened for coffee, 275,00" ; total approxi- 
mate acreage in tea in June, 1902, 386,343 scarcely a 
difference of 99 per cent I— acreage cultivated in Jane, 
1902, including cocoa, cardamoms, cinchona, and 
coffee (native gardens not being included, also, 3,356 
acres under rubber) 426,875— another proof that no 
new land had been cleared since 1878 1 M.t Fraser 
says ' the felling of the forests had really nothing 
whatever to do with the scarcity of birds. Qaite 
the reverse, in fact, for the birds have followed 
civilization all along.' Now, who ever heard of wild 
forest birds following civilization ? What are the 
insectivorous birds found about most estates now ? A 
few white-eyes (Zos;ero/?3), the common grass warbler, 
a straggling gray tit-mouse (this bird formerly lived in 
large numbers in the coffee bushes), and a robin or two 
M small birds. Where are the large insectivorous 
birds? Migratory cuckoos and wagtails still visit the 
hills, as they, no doubt, did from the time of Noah. 
Swallows and swifts hawk overhead as of old. In 
support of his contention that birds have increased 
up-country with the felling of forests, Mr Fraser 
trots out the common honse-sparrow ! This domestic 
pest is found in all interior villages. Mr. Fraser asks 
—what do we find on certain plains and patanas near 
estates ? and truly answers ' nothing, bar a few 
hawks of sorts, a lark or two, and some snipe and 
jungle fowl.' One might ask where are the birds 
which once frequented these same plains and patanas 
in plenty ? Have they, too, followed civilization, or 
flocked to the tea gardens ? No one will congratulate 
Mr. Fraser when he says : ' The jungle crow / have 
already condemned and am executing him whenever 
I get the opportunity.' It was known long before 
Mr Fraser made his recent discovery in the Indian 
tield that the jungle crow not only stole eggs but 
killed young birds. Dr. Willey rightly points out that 
it is not every bird that pilfers nests. Even 'rogue 
birds occasionally raid nests ; but not as a rule. It 
Mr. Fraser had been along the North Road from 
Kurnnegala to Dambulla, a stronghold of the 
jungle crow, he would find the jnngle and forest 
teeming with large as well as small birds, and there 
is no indication that ' the smaller birds are getting 
less plentiful ' owing to ' the increased number of 
jungle crows.' One other point before I have done. 
The crows which frequent Abbotsford are not 
' Colombo crows,' which do not dwell far from the sea- 
board, but the large black crow, the ' high-caste ' 
crow of the Sinhalese. It does not require a scientific 
person to tell this. The lizards which Mr. Fraser 
credits with amazing acrobatic feats are known to 
ordinary people— not scientists— as 'blood-suckers,' 
in the same way that a certain class of planters are 
known as ' creepers.' Mr Fraser hns not brought 
forward a single argument to supp li his new and 
astounding theory that wild birds increase in a country 
with the felling of forest and jangle ! Comment on, 
or refutation of, such a statement is almost needless. 
Cheap sneers do not advance any views, and Dr. 
Willey and Mr Peter Robinson can do very well without 
any specimens which fall to Mr Fraser's gun. .Mr. 
Praser's letter, however, should not be taken seriously, 
as he says in the opening sentence that be is going to 
give 'another yarn.' I enclose my card. — Yours, li-c,, 
COMMON-SENSE, 
AGEICULTURIST. 19i 
PRESERVATION OF INSECTIVOROUS 
BIRDS. 
[We called Mr. Nock's cattenbion to Mr, 
Fraser's letter with the following resulti 
—Ed. T.A. 
Hakgala, Nuwara Eliya, July 20, 
Dear Sir,— i2e " Birds," I am so busy that 
I am unable to study the subject sufflcieutly 
to write you anything worth printing. I en- 
tirely agree with what Mr. Fraser says on 
the subject. The m-iin thing is to put a slop 
to the coolies killing every bird tliey come 
across, but this is a difficult matter. The 
mongoose is, no doubt, one of the greatest 
enemies to bird life. These should be destroyed 
as much as possible and all other known bird 
enemies. Trees and shrubs of all sorts, which 
yield berries and give shelter, should be en- 
couraged where possible. The mulberry is one 
of the best as it grows from almost the sea- 
level to the highest mountain, and bears well 
at all elevations, and is of the easiest possible 
cultivation, growing in almost any soil and 
situation. Every district is sure to have 
suitable trees and shrubs for this purpose and 
these should easily be found by the Superin- 
tendents tiiemselves, and each should plant 
that which has been proved to do well in his 
district and then gradually add others as they 
are discovered. To give a list that would be 
any good, would take <a long time for me 
to prepare here : but it should be i-eadily 
accomplished at Feradeniya where there is a 
full Library to consult, as to the planes 
growing in the different districts. I am very 
sorry 1 can't do more now. — Yours &c., 
W. NOCK. 
THE PROTECTION OF INSECTIVOROUS 
BIRDS. 
Abbotsford, July 2i, 
Dear Sir,— It is quite a pleasure to me to 
see a letter signed " Common Sense" in the 
" Times of Ceylon " of the 22nd instant on 
this subject as, I feel sure, the mox'e this 
subject is kept before my brother pliinters 
the better it will be for the birds and us. 
I wish, however, there had been a little 
more common sense and a little less John 
Fraser in that letter as I, for one, should 
be sorry to see this discussion degenerate 
into a disputatious pen and ink squabble. 
This correspondent, as well as the "Times'" 
Editor, appears to have overlooked the fact 
that all my letters have referred solely to the 
protection of bird-life in our /u't/Ziec districts 
and the best means of enticing more and 
more of them to come to \is. llirds swarm 
in the low-country and always did so, but 
in the higher hills it was and is different. 
I know this for certain as in the early 
'seventies I amused myself strolling around 
all our higher districts on foot, for the mere 
pleasure of it, and as I have been a sincere 
lover of nature, wild or tame, ever since I 
remember anything, you may rest assured 
1 did not overlook much in the beast or 
bird line. I did all the higher districts es- 
