268 
NEW YOEK FARMERS’ CLFB, 
of disease in the abdomen, where the signs are 
concealed, may be known by pressing the hand 
upon his whole belly. When the diseased part is 
pressed, he will manifest marks of pain. 
NEW YORK FARMERS’ CLUB. 
At a late meeting of this club, Mr. Turell pre¬ 
sented the following humorous report in the Ports¬ 
mouth Journal of the New Hampshire Legislature ; 
on the 
Bounty on Crows .—Mr. Clark said as the gentle¬ 
man from Alstead (Mr. Vilas) and the gentleman : 
from New Ipswich (Mr. Preston) were in their ' 
seats, he moved that the report of the Committee on ; 
Agriculture and Manufactures, in relation to killing , 
crows and giving bounty thereon, he taken up, ! 
which motion prevailed. 
The resolution declared that it was inexpedient ; 
to legislate upon the subject. 
The bill, which had been referred to the commit¬ 
tee, was read. 
Mr. Preston said he was much obliged for the 
courtesy of his friend from Manchester in giving 
him an opportunity to speak on this subject. He 
should, in the common parlance of the day, ‘ tender 
his services,’ not to the Governor, hut in defence of 
his poor colored friend, the crow. It had been said 
that the crow did great injury to the corn held of 
the farmer. He (Mr. P.) did not believe it, and he I 
did not believe that the farmers of the State de¬ 
manded any such law, certainly the true interests 
of the farmer did not in his opinion demand it. A 
study of the habits and food of the crow would con¬ 
vince any one that the crows were not the disciples 
of Dr. Graham, hut quite the contrary. Their food 
was mostly made up of worms and insects, which 
would do ten times the injury that was ever expe¬ 
rienced from the crow, were it not that the crow, by 
destroying them, prevented injury to com crops and 
to all kind of crops 
The crow did not meddle with vegetable substan¬ 
ces or with corn, until he had made a thorough 
search for worms, and made a return of ‘ non est in¬ 
ventus. and that his appetite was in ‘ no part satis¬ 
fied [laughter]— then, and not till then, did the 
crow commence depredations upon the farmer’s 
field. 
He (Mr. P.) said he believed that if the farmer 
made proper exertions, he could keep the crows 
away—the farmer could provide proper ways for 
frightening them away. Farmers were not gene¬ 
rally aware of the immense benefit derived from 
the labors of the crow. For one, he professed to 
he a farmer, and had for a long time cultivated a 
considerable amount of land, and he had yet to 
learn that crows did more injury than benefit to the 
farmers’ crops. He would relate one instance. 
He had a piece of corn between two pieces of 
woods, in one of which, if anything can he judged 
by the noise, there was a family of crows. The 
crows constantly passed over his field of corn, day 
after day, and hour after hour, without touching a 
hill, and passed down into a meadow at some dis¬ 
tance. He had the curiosity to examine the spot 
where the crows visited, and he found that the grass 
was dry and withered in many places, caused by the 
ravages of the worms under the turf. Here the 
crows had been protecting the farmer, by destroying 
the worms which they found there. From that 
spot the crows had furnished their young with food, 
and as long as worms could be found did not touch 
the corn. Farmers did not fully appreciate such 
efforts of the crow, and the good effects resulting 
therefrom. There might be some particular in¬ 
stances when injury was done, but all considered 
the crow of incalculable benefit to the farmer. 
Cases were so rare where crows did injury, that 
he should enter the plea for them in such cases, 
which was offered by a distinguished lawyer of a 
neighboring State, that of somnambulism , and if this 
was not entertained, he should consider this whole 
proceeding as illegal, it being an attack upon an 
office held by law, for Shakspeare’s reports have it 
that crows are the “ executors of dead horses.” 1 
[Laughter.] 
He afterwards called the crow the 6t adroinistra 
tor de bonis non,” which he translated as adminis¬ 
trator on bones , and appealed to his learned friend, 
the Chairman of the Committee on Education, for 
the correctness of his translation. [Laughter.] He 
gave as another reason against the bill, that as 
crows were not the intruders upon this soil, but the 
real aborigines and joint occupants of the soil, they 
should not be driven off until a year’s notice. 
[Laughter.] 
Further, they were native Americans, and he was 
opposed to a law cutting off the heads of natives. 
He would further submit whether it would not 
be better to refer this matter to the Committee of 
Incorporations, and let them weave around the 
crows all the restrictive features of laws which 
have been passed for a few years in this State, and 
see if they would not conclude that it was a good 
State to emigrate from. [Laughter.] 
Mr. Peabody said he should go against the hill— 
If such a bill as this passed he should go for one 
to destroy the mosquito, for the mosquito was the 
more injurious bird [laughter], certainly more 
sanguinary. 
Mr. Parker, of Fitzwilliam, did not like the fea¬ 
tures of the proposed bill. It imposed upon the 
select-men the duty of cutting off the crow’s head. 
He happened to he one of the select-men of the 
town he represented, and he objected to setting a 
guillotine in front of his door for the purpose of 
taking off crows’ heads. [Laughter ] If the bill 
passed he hoped that it would be amended so that 
the one that brought the crows would cut off their 
heads. 
Mr. Yilas differed with the gentleman from New 
Ipswich, in relation to the beneficial results of the 
labors of crows. Perhaps there may be some way 
to keep off the crows, but it required that the means 
should be more scientifically understood, than was 
generally the case at this time, among farmers. 
Perhaps the gentleman from New Ipswich (Mr. 
Preston), being half lawyer and half farmer,might 
weave a net of such a kind that the crow would be 
glad to keep clear from it. 
Mr. Preston replied to some remarks of Mr 
Yilas, after which the question was taken on the 
adoption of the resolution declaring it inexpedient 
to legislate upon the subject, and it was decided in 
the negative. [A just conclusion—we vote for 
the crows.] 
