PROCEEDINGS OF THE POLYTECHNIC ASSOCIATION. 501 



their wings, as if inspired with the consciousness that victory was 

 theirs. 



At this moment I rushed forward, and after some difficulty, killed the 

 snake and cut it open. Tlierc was not a particle of food from one end to 

 the other of the intestinal canal. It must, thevefore, have been hungry; 

 and if it possessed the faculty of charming, it would undoubtedly have 

 employed its powers on audi a delicacy as these birds. 



When the dissection of the snake was finished, the birds were not to be 

 seen. It was the season when their young were in the nest; and doubtless, 

 the contiict which had just terminated, had been waged for the protection 

 of their oftspring. Less active birds, venturing as close as they did to 

 their enemy, must have been captured. 



Remaining most of the summer in the mountains of North Carolina, fre- 

 quent opportunities were afforded of inquiring of hunters and others, what 

 they knew about birds being charmed by serpents. All believed in. the 

 theory of fascination, and several had witnessed encounters such as I have 

 described; but none had ever seen the snake seize the bird. Thej' had 

 looked on until the bird as they supposed, was attempting to thrust its 

 head, under the influence of the charm, into the serpent's mouth, when they 

 had rushed forward and killed the serpent to save the bird from destruc- 

 tion. In all the inquiries made, no instance has been related where there 

 was au}-^ more evidence of fascination than in the one observed by myself. 

 In all cases, however, there was a singular uniformity in the descriptions 

 of the manner in which the birds fluttered around the snakes. So nearly 

 did their accounts correspond with what I had witnessed, that I was con- 

 vinced of the truthfulness of their statements. 



A few additional facts having an important bearing upon the subject of 

 fascination, came under my own notice during 1859. In the summer of 

 that year, some amusing incident led me to secure a number of serpents of 

 diflereut species, and amongst them a couple of fine specimens of the rat- 

 tlesnake. This serpent is somewhat sluggish in its movements, and unlike 

 many other species of its order, is not an active climber. While many 

 of the others can with ease ascend bushes, trees and precipices, to rob the 

 nests of birds of their eggs or young ones, the rattlesnake, less agile, has 

 to find its prey in a more limited range. For this reason, it has been sup- 

 posed that the rattlesnake must possess the power of fascination; other- 

 wise, it could not secure, as it does, such active animals as mice, rats, 

 squirrels, rabbits and birds; for, as has been plausibly asserted, this ser- 

 pent assuredly will not use poisoned food; will not first strike the animals 

 it designs to eat; and then, some of these animals are combatants of no 

 trifling power, and could easily kill the snake or escape from it; so that 

 unless the rattlesnake is endowed with the ability to fascinate, it is averred 

 it could itvt possibly capture the food upon which it subsists. 



The opinion that venomous serpents do not eat the animals they kill by 

 the poison of their fangs, like many other popular notions, turned out to be 

 an error. This I know from my own personal observation; and for the 

 satisfaction of naturalists a few particulars are given. My specimens were 

 placed in a box covered with glass, and having a wooden lid secured by 

 lock and key. A few small holes, for ventilation, were made in the sides 



