6 
the greater part of her bird population, deterioration of nearly all crops was the 
immediate result and the policy toward the birds was quickly changed. In Virginia 
and Carolina at one time war was especially waged on the woodpeckers till it was 
found that the forests and orchards were suffering from wood-boring insects. During 
the French-Revolution guns came for the first time into the hands of the people and 
great scarcity of food prevailed, so all birds were indiscriminately shot; the effects 
on orchards, fields and vineyards were soon so apparent that, in many districts, 
stringent laws for their protection were enforced. Prussia once, believing it would 
benefit agriculture, ordered a tax of twelve birds heads to be paid annually by each 
farmer; it took Prussia just two years to learn by sad experience the error of her 
ways. I could enumerate many such instances. Even within the present decade a 
committee of the House of Commons, appointed to investigate a plague of the field 
mice that was destroying the crops in several counties in the British Isles, reported 
that it was chiefly due to the scarcity of owls and hawks, and recommended the pro¬ 
tection of birds of prey. 
AVe of Illinois may congratulate ourselves that birds have not disappeared 
from our land as they have from other less fortunate districts. It is true birds are 
fewer than they used to be, but this decrease is chiefly among the larger species. 
Lovers of nature may regret that so many interesting forms are disappearing, and 
the increasing scarcity of game birds and waterfowls will deprive us of an important 
food supply ; but it is the small birds of the field and orchard in which the farmer 
is most interested and these, save in a very few localities, are practically as nume¬ 
rous as ever. But the same causes are now at work that have elsewhere produced 
such serious consequences. Our population is increasing, our cities are growing, 
the prairies are tilled, the woods and marshes are disappearing. Whatever its ef¬ 
fect on the birds we look with righteous pride on the material growth of our state. 
But there is another side to the picture on which we must look with feelings far 
otherwise than pride. Cheap firearms are everywhere, birds are shot indiscrimi¬ 
nately for “the fun of the thing,’’ many thousands are slaughtered for millinery 
purposes, Italians and others who eat anything that wears feathers, however small, 
are congregating in many of our towns, nests innumerable are destroyed by youth¬ 
ful egg collectors. In the face of such wanton destruction it is time the friends of 
the birds should bestir themselves for it is an old saying that “prevention is better 
than cure.’’ 
But, it might well be asked, while granting the importance of birds, ^nd 
their benefit on the whole to horticulture, are there not certain species that could 
well be spared, special crops that birds materially injure, or particular times of the 
year when their presence in our orchards and gardens is entirely harmful ? To 
answer such questions the subject must be approached in more detail. 
How are we to tell what a bird eats? We can whatch the birds and by pa¬ 
tient observation determine much of their habits. Many important contributions 
to science have thus been made, but for our present purposes it gives uncertain 
and one-sided results. We cannot in most cases be sure we really see what a bird 
is eating and it is usually impossible to follow its movements long or tell of what 
its food as a whole consist. Birds can be kept in confinement and their habits there 
will teach us many lessons, but this method is quite too narrow and artificial for 
our purpose. The method of research most frequently used, and that it is now 
agreed gives the most complete and reliable results, is the examination of the sto¬ 
mach contents of the dead bird. This has been well called “ the court of final ap- 
