165 



of family claim to their dangerous mode of defence — the 

 poison bag. But in every other respect the Platypus is a true 

 mammal, though of a very low type; and it is very far from 

 probable, that (out of all that huge and important class) the 

 Monotremes alone should be entrusted with so terrible a 

 weapon. Moreover, the faculty is still further restricted ; for 

 you must remember that this privilege is entirely confined to 

 the male. In the young female indeed, a small rudimentary spur 

 exists (as we learn from both Owen and Water house) ; but 

 this disappears as the animal advances in age ; and in mature 

 life its absence is marked by a slight depression. 



Moreover, if we are to be in any degree guided by analogy, 

 we should look for the poison bag in the weaker rather than 

 in the more powerful sex. At least in the only class in which 

 this means of defence is confined to one of the two sexes (I 

 allude to the insects), it is invariably the female, not the male, 

 which makes its presence felt by its sting. On the other 

 hand I do not give much importance to Dr. Bennett's argu- 

 ment, that he could -mot force the animal to attack him, and 

 that the scratch which he received from the spur, caused him 

 no pain. Nothing is more certain, than that the poison of 

 snakes varies in potency at different seasons of the year, and 

 that its virulence depends largely on the circumstances under 

 which it is received. 



Baden Powell (in his work called New Homes for the Old 

 Country) observes — " That the Platypus does not attack men 

 with Ills spurs when caught, may perhaps be attributed to 

 the fact that he is then entirely out of his element. In the 

 water possibly he may be able to make good use of an arm, 

 which, if poisonous, would indeed be most formidable. In 

 cases where scratches have been received from the spur with- 

 out evil effect, the result may be due to the reservoir of the 

 poison being at the time empty, owing to previous struggles." 



Making allowance, however, for all theoretical difiiculties, 

 how are we to account for the serious swelling and extraordi- 

 nary effects suffered by INIr. Simson, except on the supposition 

 of poison having been introduced into his system ? 



I am well aware that wounds from claws are often very dis- 

 agreeable and lasting in their efiects — even in cases (as of 

 the lion) where there is no suspicion of poison. But in the 

 instance before us, the smallness of the wound — a clean punc- 

 ture, not an irregular laceration — the intensity of the accom- 

 panying symptoms, the celerity with which the parts affected 

 were attacked, seem to point to something more potent than 

 the mere tearing of the flesh. 



Still all this is circumstantial evidence, and not of a direct 

 nature. 



