THE DELUSION DISPELLED. 169 



Bay, in his "Wisdom of God in Creation," fully discusses tLis 

 " shower of Frogs' " question, and shows how entirely groundless 

 is the common opinion on the subject. But, more than this, he 

 gives us, on the authority of his friend Mr. Derham, an account 

 of one of the said "showers," which clearly shows how the 

 popular notion originated. Mr. Derham relates, that one after- 

 noon, while riding in Berkshire, he came upon an immense multi- 

 tude of minute Frogs crossing the road. There had been a 

 shower of rain only an hour or so before, and he immediately 

 thought of what he had heard of the raining of Frogs. But not 

 being a believer in that sort of thing, he determined to search into 

 the matter. On examining the neighbourhood, he found two or 

 three acres of ground nearly covered with a vast " black regiment," 

 which was proceeding all in one direction towards some woods 

 and ditches at a short distance in front, and which he traced back 

 to a large pond that in spring-time, he ascertained, always 

 abounded with Frogs from which circumstances he very pro- 

 perly concludes that the little wayfarers had come, not from the 

 clouds, but from the pond whence they were marching ; that 

 they had been tempted to set out on their journey by the recent 

 shower, and were going bodily in search of fresh provender. 



Let us now glance briefly at some of the less familiar forms of 

 the Batrachia, preparatory to giving our attention more at length 

 to the little fellows with whom we are better acquainted. 



At the very bottom of the series, if in the series at all, and on 

 the very boundary line between the fishes and the Batrachians 

 if such a boundary line be really allowable stands the singular 

 creature first exhibited alive in this country at the Crystal Palace, 

 Sydenham, and now numbered amongst the treasures of the 

 Zoological Gardens as the " Mud-fish " (Lepido&iren annectans). 

 There is a dispute amongst naturalists as to whether the " Mud- 

 fish " should be classed with the fishes or the Batrachians. Dr. 

 Natterer, the discoverer of the animal, regards it as a Batrachian 

 reptile, and in this opinion most of the writers on natural histoiy 

 agree ; but Professor Owen, relying, we believe, chiefly on the 

 peculiar character of the animal's nose, places it amongst the 

 fish. It would be more correct, perhaps, to say placed, for since 

 Professor Owen has had the opportunity of examining the speci- 

 mens recently living in this country, he appears to incline to 

 the opinion that the creature is properly neither fish nor reptile, 



