very like the fox-their head and ears remarkably so. These dogs are kept purposely for catching rabbits, but strange to say, they never kill them. They are not taught to preserve the life of the rabbits, but it is their nature. Ferrets are not always used with these dogs, yet they often catch larger rabbits than they can carry. They are of no use as watch-dogs; this I learnt from the people who have them. Their colour is not that of the fox, but in most cases it is something similar; many of them are a mixture of reddish brown and blacktheir size is that of a small Scotch terrier, with long back and very short legs, and a large tail not unlike the fox's brush.

"In Ireland we have a good many small smooth black terriers: I am told they are most sagacious animals. Also small black spaniels, likewise very intelligent. These dogs are chiefly found with the gentry and amongst the better class of farmers. There are also a large number of bulldogs kept by the farmers, very fierce brutes, not only wicked to strangers, but just the same, if vexed, with those to whom they belong. I have seen some dogs of this kind in the county Limerick, where they are very numerous. If left without their food for any time, be it ever so short, after their usual hour, they become so furious that no one dare go near them. They are kept tied up all day and let loose at night in the farmyard. In appearance they resemble the English bulldog, but are a muddy-white in colour, and some are cream-coloured."

CHAPTER XXIX.

EVERAL naturalists have laboured to confound the iden

SEVE

tity of the dog with that of the wolf, fox, and jackal, (particularly the former), animals his very opposites in moral nature. Their arguments consist principally of assertions of an entire similitude of structure; that the dog and wolf will breed together, and the progeny is fertile; that the wolf is capable of the highest domestication and great affection for man; and finally (which is correct), that the period of gestation is the same. Now, in the first place, if the wolf, fox, jackal, and dog, are the same animal, how is it they have different names? How is it that their habits, when in a wild state, roaming through the forest and uninfluenced by man, are so different? If the dog is a wolf, then the dog is also a fox; but the life of a fox is not like the life of a wild dog; on the contrary, it is very much opposed to it. The construction of the eye of the fox is not similar to the eye of the dog, and there are other points which are very inharmonious with each other. The position of the dog and fox being identical in species is, however, quite untenable, as much so as the identity of the dog and hyena, which also has been argued for. Relinquishing, nevertheless, that style of argument, and addressing the question of the similarity of the dog and wolf

alone. The similarity of structure is denied by Richardson,' who asserts that the intestines of the wolf are shorter; the orbits higher and more forward in the skull; the proportion between the bones of the hind legs is different; also the number of toes; and the structure of the teeth, which are larger, stronger, and longer, and the molars more adapted for breaking bones, than in the dog;-altogether, that the wolf is formed for more carnivorous pursuits than the dog.

That the dog and wolf will breed together, and that the progeny is fertile (fertile at least to a very limited extent, for no more has been proved), is correct. Nevertheless this amounts to little. The fertility of hybrids of animals far more widely separated than the dog and wolf has been abundantly proved, and proved, too, to a far greater extent than anything ever achieved respecting those two. No one can doubt that the hare and rabbit are totally distinct creatures. In hair, skin, anatomy, colour, odour, and habits, they are very far asunder. They bear great animosity to each other; their fecundity differs greatly. Though in a state of nature and living near each other, they never mix or mingle, and while one trusts to speed and the open field for safety from its enemies, the other takes refuge in its burrow. Yet the fertility of hybrids between the hare and rabbit has been demonstrated and established beyond the shadow of a doubt. Monsieur Rouy, of Angoulême, commenced in 1847 to breed for commercial purposes between the hare and rabbit. He has propagated the race (which he has named Leporides) for at least thirteen generations without any diminution of vigour in the animals,

1 H. D. Richardson on the Dog. W. S. Orr & Co.

of which he sends above a thousand yearly to market.' Richardson asserts that the progeny of the dog and wolf are sterile with each other.

Wolves and wild dogs are found in the same forests; now if they were the same animal this would not be the case; they would intermingle, and all distinction soon be obliterated. On the contrary, they live apart, and are totally different in appearance. Where sexual connexion takes place between the dog and wolf, it is (except in the Arctic regions) owing to their being artificially brought together, and whilst under the overpowering influence of nature's law of propagation. But it is "lust hard by hate," and those very creatures, and though of opposite sexes, would, from their intense hostility, destroy each other at any other time. If dogs were wolves they would, in a wild state, revert rapidly to their original type. If dogs are wolves, wolves are dogs, and should be easily reclaimed. But the prophet of nature tells us, "He's mad that trusts in the tameness of a wolf."

Does any man believe that he could, in even half a century, by breeding and educating pure wolves, ever convert them into sheep-dogs? Does he think the wolf would dwell with the lamb? Would he trust his flocks to them on the downs of Sussex or the hill-sides of the Highlands? "They would have a wild trick of their ancestors!" Buffon bred dogs and wolves for four generations, but left no satisfactory result. Frederic Cuvier in later experiments attested that procreative power lessened by degrees in the mule race of dog and wolf. The following account, taken from 'Bell's Life' the 16th of

1 Studies in Animal Life. Lewes, 1862.

November, 1862, is another singular proof of progeny arising from animals of totally different races:—

"EXTRAORDINARY CURIOSITY.-A SUBJECT FOR NATURALISTS.--We had submitted to our inspection on Friday last two hybrid animals, whose existence certainly is an incontestable answer to the question which has often been mooted by naturalists,-Can or will animals of the canine and feline race breed together?' The animals to which we allude are the produce of a lioness and a true English mastiff. They are a dog and bitch, and are about seven weeks old. The bitch presents no extraordinary feature, and at first glance would be taken for a mongrel, while the dog at once catches the eye as something uncommon. He has all the true colour of the African lion, has a black stripe down his back, and a species of black fringe under the jowl, which has all the appearance of an incipient mane. Both animals have the power of extending and retracting the claws like a cat; and their movements, especially those of the male, when playing together and when feeding, partake more of the feline than the canine method. The male stands nearly a foot high, the female not quite so large; their limbs are immensely powerful, and their general appearance assures one that, when full grown, they will be most formidable customers. they are really what they are represented to us is a matter of certainty and not of speculation. The mother was brought to this country four years back by Captain W. H. PattenSaunders, and given to his mother, in whose possession shehas been ever since. The sire, a fine mastiff, has also been in that lady's possession for the same period. They have

VOL. I.

Z.

That