36 FLORIDA RAT. 



prominent, and bright eyes ; together with its fine form and easy suscep- 

 tibility of domestication, would render it a far more interesting pet than 

 many others that the caprice of man has from time to time induced him 

 to select. 



GEOGRAPHICAL DISTKIBUTION. 



This species is very widely scattered through the country. It was 

 brought from East Florida by Mr. Ord, in 1818, but not published until 

 1825. It was then supposed by him to be peculiar to Florida, and re- 

 ceived its specific name from that circumstance. We had, however, ob- 

 tained a number of specimens, both of this species and the cotton rat, 

 (Sigmodon hispidum,) in 1816, in South Carolina, where they are very 

 abundant. In Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri, and 

 the former States, it is a common species. Its numbers diminish greatly 

 as we travel eastward. In North Carolina some specimens of it have 

 been obtained. We observed a few nests among the valleys of the Vir- 

 ginia mountains ; farther north we have not personally traced it, although 

 we have somewhere heard it stated that one or two had been captured 

 as far to the north as Maiyland. 



GENERAL REMARKS. 



On a farther examination of Bartram's work, which is also referred to 

 by GoDMAN, (Nat. Hist., vol. ii., p. 21,) we find his descriptions of the 

 habits of this species very accurate ; the first part of that article, how- 

 ever, quoted by Dr. Godman, is evidently incorrect. " The wood rat," 

 says Barteam, " is a very curious animal ; they are not half the size of 

 the domestic rat, of a dark brown or black colour ; thin tail, slender and 

 shorter in proportion, and covered thinly with short hair." The error of 

 Barteam, in describing one species, and applying to it the habits of an- 

 other, seems to have escaped the observation of Dr. Godman. The cotton 

 rat, or as it is generally called, wood rat, {Sigmodon hispidum^ answers 

 this description of Barteam, in its size, colour, and tail ; but it does not 

 build " conical pyramids ;" this is the work of a much larger and very dif- 

 ferent species — the Florida rat of this article. 



The adoption of the genus Neotoma, when proposed by Say and Oed, 

 was met with considerable opposition by naturalists of that day, and 

 some severe strictures were passed upon it by Drs. Haelan and Godman, 

 (See Harlan, p. 143, Godman, vol. ii., p. 72.) They contended that the 

 variations in the teeth that separated this species from Mus and Arvicola, 

 were not sufiicient to establish genuine distinctions. 



More recently naturalists have, however, examined the subject calmly 



