February 23, 1893] 



NATURE 



391 



ested in the success of the experiment now in progress in 

 the Dublin Gardens, where over one hundred Hon cubs 

 have been successfully reared, he thinks it desirable to 

 record all the details which he has been able to collect 

 on the subject. 



So far as can be ascertained the only lion-tiger cubs, 

 as they have been called, which were ever produced be- 

 longed to several distinct Utters by different parents, 

 perhaps, but in the same menagerie — that of F. Atkins, 

 of Windsor. 



The father of the first litter of these cubs was a lion 

 bred in Atkins's menagerie, the head-quarters of which 

 were at Windsor. The mother was an imported tigress. 

 From Griffith's account ("Animal Kingdom," vol. ii. 

 p. 448, 1827) it would seem that the lion and tigress 

 were about two years together, in the same cage, before 

 any issue appeared. The first litter, consisting of three 

 cubs, was born at Windsor on October 17, 1824— 

 being the result of a particular intercourse which lasted 

 for ten or twelve days in the beginning of the previous 

 July. The cubs were shortly afterwards exhibited to his 

 Majesty, who, according to the showman's own handbill 

 —a copy of which has been lent to me by Dr. William 

 Frazer— christened them lion-tigers. The lion died six 

 weeks afterwards, and the cubs, as related by Griffith, 

 were fostered by several bitches and a goat, and it was 

 •expected would attain to maturity ; but although there is 

 no clear intimation as to the exact date when this was 

 written, the figures of the cubs accompanying the account 

 are said to represent them at the age of only about three 

 rrionths. It is stated by one writer, however, that they 

 did not attain to maturity (" English Cyclopaedia Nat. 

 Hist ," vol. ii. p. 763, art. " Felidas," 1854). 



The next litter was born at Edinburgh on December 

 31, 1827, according to Atkins's showbill and Sir William 

 Jardine's works.^ There were two cubs, and it would 

 seem that they were exhibited together with, and there- 

 fore probably reared by, the mother, in the same den ; 

 but whether she were the same tigress as the mother of 

 the previous litter is not clear. 



They were seen by Sir William Jardine in September, 

 1828, and his figures may have been taken from them ; but 

 it has some resemblance in details, though not in general 

 pose, to the figures published by Griffith of the 1824 

 litter. It would seem that Sir William was under the 

 impression that it was these very cubs which were sub- 

 sequently exhibited together with their parents in the 

 same cage in the autumn of 1 829. But there is a difficulty 

 in accepting this conclusion, because the stuffed specimens 

 of these two cubs still exist— one in the British Museum 

 (Natural History) and the other in the Science and Art 

 Museum, Edinburgh. I have recently had opportunities 

 of examining both, and I should be inclined to think that 

 the cubs were not more than about nine or ten months 

 old when they died. So that either the cubs seen in 1829 

 were born subsequently to December 31, 1827, or the 

 stuffed cubs just referred to must have been born previous 

 to that date. That the cub in the British Museum was 

 presented by J. Atkins, of Windsor, is attested by Dr. 

 •Gray's " Old List," page 40, which, through the courtesy 

 of Dr. Giinther, I have been able to consult. 



That the specimen in Edinburgh was one of those born 

 in 1827, and figured by Sir William Jydine, is, indeed, 

 stated in the ''English Cyclopaedia," which adds that 

 the cubs of that litter died young. Hence, it seems most 

 probable that the cubs seen in the autumn of 1829 

 belonged to a subsequent litter, as has been suggested 

 above. Further, Mr. J. G. Robertson, formerly of 

 Kilkenny, has informed me that he saw a lion, tigress, 

 and their three hybrid cubs in one cage in Kilkenny, 

 where they were brought by a showman about the year 

 1832, They were the sole stock of the show. 



1 "The Menageries, Quadrupeds," Sir William Jardine (2nd edition), 

 vol. 1. pp. 191, 192. 1830. 



NO. 1217, VOL. 47] 



Accordingly, it seems that besides the definitely 

 attested births of the years 1824 and 1827, there were 

 also, probably, some others. One of the accounts states 

 that there is no great difficulty in promoting the union of 

 the two species. 



Besides the cub already referred to as having been pre- 

 sented to the British Museum by J. Atkins, 1 have also 

 been shown by Dr. Giinther unmounted skins of two re- 

 puted hybrid lion-tiger cubs, which are said in Dr. Gray's 

 list to have been purchased from a dealer named Mathur, 

 in 1842. They cannot, I think, have survived more than 

 two or three days after birth, and their markings are too 

 indistinct to justify any special description, particularly as 

 their parentage is not more definitely attested. But it is 

 of some importance to place on record here what is said 

 as to the markings of the cubs first referred to. The 

 specimens in the British and the Edinburgh Museums 

 are both somewhat faded. In Gray's list the former is 

 thus described : " Hybrid cub between lion and tigress ; 

 yellow ; back slightly waved ; limbs and tail banded with 

 black." 



Sir William Jardine merely says the general colour was 

 not so bright as that of the tiger, and the transverse 

 bands were more obscure. 



Griffith describes the cubs he figured as follows : — 



" Our mules, in common with ordinary lions, were born 

 without any traces of a mane, or of a tuft at the end of the 

 tail. Their fur in general was rather woolly ; the external 

 ear was pendant towards the extremity ; the nails were 

 constantly out, and not cased in the sheath, and in these 

 particulars they agreed with the common cubs of lions. 

 Their colour was dirty yellow or blanket colour : but from 

 the nose over the head, along the back and upper side of 

 the tail the colour was much darker, and on these parts 

 the transverse stripes were stronger, and the forehead was 

 covered with obscure spots, slighter indications of which 

 also appeared on other parts of the body. The shape of 

 the head, as appears by the figures, is assimilated to that 

 of the father's (the lion) ; the superfineness of the body on 

 the other hand is like that of the tigress " (p. 449). 



Prof. R. H. Traquair, F.R.S., keeper of the natural 

 history division of the Edinburgh Museum, has kindly had 

 a photograph taken of the specimen above referred to 

 prepared for me, and the transverse markings are dis- 

 tinctly visible in this picture. 



I am tempted to conclude this record with an extract 

 from Atkins's somewhat quaintly-expressed handbill, 

 which does not bear any date, but probably belonged to 

 the year 1828. The greater part of the bill consists of a 

 long poetical description of the family with "a tigress 

 their dam, and a lion their sire," and of the numerous 

 distinguished persons who had paid them a visit. The 

 following prose portion will probably be sufficient to 

 extract from what is possibly one of i&^ still existing 

 copies of the handbill. 



"ATKIN'S IMMENSE MENAGERIE. 



"Wonderful Phenomenon in Nature. 



" The singular^ and hitherto deemed impossible, occur- 

 rence of Lion and Tigress in one den. 

 " Cohabiting and producing young, again took place in 

 this menagerie, on the 31st of December, 1827, at the 

 City of Edinburgh, when the royal tigress brought forth 

 two fine cubs ! ! And they are now to be seen in the 

 same den with their sire and dam. The first litter of 

 these extraordinary animals were presented to our most 

 gracious Sovereign, when he was pleased to express con- 

 siderable gratification, and to call them lion-tigers, than 

 which a more appropriate name could not have been 

 given. The great interest the lion and tigress have 

 excited is unprecedented ; they are a source of irresistible 

 attraction, especially as it is the only instance of the kind 



