62 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE 
feet, but that he kept exceedingly quiet. The next day 
he was very dull—ill, as I thought—and I was inclined 
to the belief, from the way he moved, that possibly one 
side was partially paralysed; but -finding that he had 
eaten a good deal of what had been given him (oats), I 
began to be suspicious. Notwithstanding this apparent 
injury, that very day, when showing a friend the 
animal, on lifting aside one of the slats a little, he 
made such a rush for the opening that he all but 
escaped. On the third day after his capture, having 
left the sitting-room (usually occupied by two others 
besides myself) in which he was kept for a period of 
about two hours, I was told, on my return, by a maid- 
servant and a boy employed about the house, that some 
time previously the squirrel had escaped by the window, 
and, descending the wall of the house, which was 
“rough-cast,” he had run off briskly along a neigh- 
bouring fence, and disappeared at the root of a’ tree. 
When asked if they saw any evidence of lameness, 
they laughed at the idea, after his recent performances 
before their eyes. For several days I observed a squirrel 
running about, apparently quite well, in the quarter in 
which my animal had escaped, and I feel satisfied that 
it was the squirrel that I had recently had in confine- 
ment, but, of course, of this I cannot be certain. 
I believe, now, that this was a case of feigning, for 
if the injury had been so serious as the first symptoms 
would imply, or if there had been real paralysis, it 
could not have disappeared so suddenly. An animal, 
even partially paralysed, could scarcely have escaped as 
he did and show no signs of lameness. His apparent 
insensibility at first may have been due to catalepsy or 
slight stunning. But while there are elements of 
doubt in this first case, there are none such in that 
about to be described. 
\ 
