50 Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society. 



to be unknown," which statement was published without 

 comment by Sir William Jardine.* 



In 1853 Macgillivray visited Braemar, and there he could 

 find no trace of it, though he " not only looked for it, but 

 made inquiries respecting it of various persons qualified to 

 give correct information. Mr Cuming had never seen or 

 heard of it; nor had any other individual of whom I 

 asked ; " but he adds : " Sir William Jardine says it also 

 occurs on the Don." -I* This statement of Sir W. Jardine's 

 may very likely have been called forth, owing to the state- 

 ment in the " I^aturalists' Library " above quoted, and have 

 been the result of further inquiry since that time; but I 

 have failed to find it recorded anywhere amongst Sir 

 William's writings, so probably it was orally supplied. % 



Mr George Sim of Aberdeen, who has supplied me with 

 much useful and interesting material for this county, writes 

 to me as follows : "I, of course, cannot say when the 

 squirrel first made its appearance on Deeside, yet I am 

 satisfied it must have been prior to 1853, and I think Mac- 

 gilHvray not having heard of it may be accounted for in this 

 way : Until lately it was scarcely known by the name of 

 squirrel, being usually called ferret, foumart, or futteret, by 

 the country people. Even now, when it is much more com- 

 mon, it is often so called. And since Macgillivray did not 

 see it himself, any inquiry respecting it under its proper 

 name would not have been understood." In reply to further 

 inquiry, Mr Sim assures me that these erroneous names are 

 often (indeed commonly) applied to the squirrel by country 

 people who bring him specimens for stuffing at the present 

 day. 



This argument, however, I can hardly bring myself to 

 accept, because Macgillivray distinctly says he "made in- 

 quiries respecting it of various persons qualified to give correct 

 information. Mr Cuming had never seen or heard of it, nor 



* "Nat. Library," vol. vii., p. 233. 



+ " Deeside and Braemar," p. 390. 



Z Very probably had Macgillivray had the opportunity of revising his own 

 proofs, which he had not, as the work was a posthumous publication, he 

 would have supplied further information as to this record. 



