152 
The Balance of Nature. 
[April, 
but official notices have been posted up throughout the 
country, by order of the Minister of Agriculture, pointing 
out what birds, inserts, &c., are injurious and should be 
destroyed, and what are useful and should be spared. 
Perhaps Waterton’s highest claim upon our esteem and 
gratitude must be based upon his energetic protest against 
such indiscriminate slaughter as we have just mentioned. 
Though a most humane and kindly man, he spoke not as a 
hysterical humanitarian, ever seeking to protect evil-doers, 
whether brute or human, rats or garotters, from the well- 
merited consequences of their misdeeds. His protest was 
uttered in the name of common sense no less than in that 
of compassion. He had, during a long and aCtive life, de- 
voted almost exclusively and under exceptionally favourable 
circumstances to observation, carefully examined the struc- 
ture and the habits of birds and of certain mammals, and 
had noted the kinds of food which they seleCt. His park 
was simply an ornithological “ station,” where all kinds of 
British birds were as far as possible protected, in order that 
they might be closely and accurately studied. Hence he 
was enabled to pronounce with authority as to what species 
were to be viewed as man’s friends, and which were to be 
ranked as enemies. Not a few more recent British natu- 
ralists — among whom honourable mention is due to the 
Rev. Messrs. F. O. Morris and Tristram — have followed in 
his footsteps ; and if our Legislature has been induced to 
extend any measure of protection to wild birds not in the 
game-list, to Waterton and to his disciples belongs the 
credit. 
If asked, however, to describe in a few words Waterton’s 
system of establishing a “ balance of Nature ” suitable for 
inhabited countries, we should reply that he sought to 
minimise the amount of man’s interference. He would not 
sign the death-warrant of any creature till positively proved 
to be injurious ; and if the evidence was imperfeCt, then, in 
accordance with the old-established practice of English 
justice, but in flat opposition to the custom of English 
gamekeepers, he would give the accused the benefit of the 
doubt. More than this, if — an exceedingly common case — 
any species were found to be in some respeCts harmful, but 
beneficial in others, he would endeavour to balance the evil 
against the good. Here, of course, there is room for a 
diversity of opinion among men of different views, interests, 
and prejudices. Suppose, for instance, that some particular 
bird frees our fields from millions of destructive inseCts, but 
at the same time occasionally carries off the eggs of the 
