COMPARISON WITH OTHER ANIMALS 295 



though ponies and mules, if never shod from their birth, 

 can go over any ground if their hoofs are regularly 

 looked after; (2) requires more attendants; (3) carries 

 only half the weight a camel can ; (4) requires food and 

 water to be carried for him. Now as to the camel : (1) 

 he has greater powers of abstinence from food and water ; 

 (2) carries double ; (3) requires fewer drivers ; (4) is 

 never shod ; (5) procurable in greater numbers and 

 more easily ; (6) initial outlay less; (7) cost of main- 

 tenance less. It is asserted that a number of camels 

 will cover half the length of road on the line of march 

 that the equivalent number of mules will ; for instance, 

 800 camels tied in strings will cover about from 1 \ to 

 1|- mile, while 1,600 mules will extend nearly 3 miles ; 

 but I doubt this very much, as the latter do not 

 straggle so much, and, being more even-paced, keep 

 better together. 



Lieut. Massoutier, in comparing a camel with a 

 mule, is of opinion that, because of the special treat- 

 ment and management of the former, which necessi- 

 tates extra supervision and greater care and attention, 

 more trouble in fact, it is more difficult to keep order 

 and regularity in a convoy of camels than in one of 

 mules. Certainly, so far as we are concerned, and 

 under existing conditions, I think he is right, because 

 we know nothing of the camels, invariably get animals 

 of the worst description, and place them in the hands 

 of useless and incompetent men. But if we were to 

 reverse this order of things, I feel quite convinced that 

 we should attain the very best results, and find that 

 order and regularity could be as well, if not better, 

 kept among camels than mules. The latter, as a rule, 



