1896. CUNNING IN ANIMALS. 383 



believe this, is to imply that the artifices are reasoned out indepen- 

 dently to meet a special case, instead of being, as it seems to me they 

 are, the outcome of an hereditary practice of caution or wariness. To 

 argue further that the stag deliberately resorts to these devices, " to 

 confuse imaginary hounds which may possibly be on the scent," is to 

 interpret the actions from a purely human point of view, believing 

 that because a man, under given circumstances, would imagine and 

 do so and so, therefore an animal can arrive at a similar outward 

 result by no other method. In the case of the stag, I see no reason to 

 believe that any idea or 'construct' of hounds is formed. It is merely 

 in interpreting the actions that this idea has been formed. Sir 

 E. Tennent relates (" Natural History of Ceylon," p. 35) that the 

 habit of the jackal, after having run down its prey, is to conceal it in 

 the jungle and issue forth on a tour of observation lest any predatory 

 enemy may be near, afterwards returning to the carcase. In cases 

 where this has been observed, and the observer has been discovered 

 by the jackal, it is further stated that the jackal may practise the ruse 

 of seizing some object in its mouth and setting off with it, in the hope 

 of misleading the observer. Both the stag and the jackal, it seems to 

 me, are simply employing their intelligence or cunning in guarding 

 against what we may justly describe as an ever-present dread of attack 

 in certain experienced lines. They are not imagining special cases o 

 attack, and having calculated the best means of circumventing them, 

 carrying their studied plans into execution : such work is reserved 

 for generals and field-marshals. When a herd of red deer lies down 

 for the midday siesta the sentinel is always alert on some convenient 

 eminence. When a weasel runs into a hole he invariably looks out 

 almost immediately : it is an excellent time to shoot him. This is 

 observation akin to the jackal's, but I need not attempt to imagine the 

 weasel's reason. 



The instance of the stag, however, leads us naturally to 

 the most remarkable cases of cunning related of the fox. The 

 device adopted by the stag though not pursued, would, if repeated 

 during a hunt, produce one of the cunning stratagems fairly well 

 known in hunting. A fox, having a good distance between it and 

 the hounds, has been known after crossing a wall and running well 

 into an open field beyond, to retrace its steps and strike off at right 

 angles under cover of the wall. The hounds, clearing the wall, pick 

 up the scent on the opposite side, run well out into the field and throw 

 up their noses. This example is practically an accelerated version of 

 the stag's case. Like every instance of a fox's cunning escape from 

 hounds, it is a method which depends for success on the hounds being 

 misled in the matter of scent. A foxhound is a marvellously stupid 

 animal if it has no scent to guide it. A fox, if over-run by a pack of 

 hounds, can double back and pass through the midst of the hounds, 

 while they are intently searching the ground with their noses. A 

 greyhound, on the other hand, is helpless unless it keeps the hare full 



