ih Re 
nm 
138 On Moles. fo 
that it will be found to render more service than to do 
mischief; I mean in our larger fields. When it gets 
into gardens, it may do much mischief. But even here, 
if I do not greatly mistake, the evils which have been 
‘ascribed to this little animal, have been much exagger- 
ated. I could show you, that it even does some good 
in the gardens. 
Should you, or any other member of the society, 
_ deem it worthy of your attention to inquire into the cor- 
rectness of the general notion, that our mole Is a very 
pernicious animal, I hope you will be careful to specify 
the animal to which your observations may refer. We 
have, at least, two species of moles near Philadelphia, 
which are in many respects, different; I mean the So- 
vex aquaticus about which I am most concerned, and 
the species called by our farmers, the ‘‘star-nose-mole,” 
or Sorex eristatus. Confining myself to the former spe- 
cies, much the most common, let me ask the following 
questions: viz. 
1. What kind of grounds are most frequented by this 
animal ? Is it ever found in the wetter meadows ? 
2. What vegetables does it chiefly consume? Does 
it injure the roots of the red-clover? Does it ever in- 
jure the Indian corn ? 
3. What insects does it eat? Does it not devour 
grubs, and other /arve, of beetles, &c. 
A. In what way does it prove most injurious ? 
5. By loosening the earth, and thereby enabling the 
radicles of different plants to progress with more faci- 
lity ; and by devouring a portion of the radicles which 
it meets with, does not the mole of the United States, 
do quite as much good as harm ? 
