Judging from much that is said in the earlier works on 
British birds, it would seem that the owl has fallen into evil 
repute in comparatively recent times. Latham, about three- 
quarters of a century ago, spoke of “ their manners being known 
to every farmer, whose barns supply them with food, and under 
whose protection they live.” Lord Cathcart, writing about three 
years ago on “Wild Birds in/relation to Agriculture,” says: 
“ All the owls are much valued by naturalists : rats and mice 
are their principal food. When I was a young man I remember 
at Thornton-le-Street plenty of white owls, such beauties, but 
every man’s hand—or rather trigger-finger—was against them. 
Our ancestors, wiser than we are, always made in their great 
barns ingress for owls—an owl hole—with often a stone perch.” 
Such a barn I lately saw, with square hole and stone perch for 
the birds; an ancient stately stone barn, built by the monks of 
the adjoining Cistercian Abbey about seven centuries ago. 
Of all those who have given valuable testimony in favour of 
the owl, undoubtedly the first is Charles Waterton. A more 
eloquent plea than his was never penned ; and it is hoped that 
in the form in which it is now issued by the Society for the 
Protection of Birds, it will reach very many persons who are not 
acquainted with the volume in which it originally appeared 
over half a century ago (“ Essays ; First Series,” 1838). In 
this reprint one long passage, in which the author goes a 
little outside of his subject, has been omitted. 
