KIDD'S OWN JOURNAL. 



153 



valiant endeavors to exterminate the Mole from 

 the face of the earth ! If a hundred men and 

 horses were employed in a common-sized pasture, 

 say from fifteen hundred to two thousand acres, in 

 raising and carrying manure for a top-dressing for 

 that farm, they could not do it so effectually, so 

 neatly, or so equally, as the natural number of 

 Moles on that farm would do it of themselves." 

 Thus then I have disposed of the first silly charge 

 against this useful and innocent little sub-culti- 

 vator. I would further remark, that it is not so 

 wise to throttle hiin,'as you may think. 



The second great charge against our u blessed 

 little pioneer," is, " that he eats the seed-corn, 

 and destroys the roots in the construction of his 

 hills." This charge is so utterly absurd, that it 

 carries with it its own refutation. That they eat 

 grain I flatly deny, having examined the stomachs 

 of many. I have never found an atom of a grain 

 in them ! But it is stated, and that on good au- 

 thority, that sixty thousand bushels of seed-corn 

 are yearly destroyed by wireworms [Elateridoe), 

 some of which, it is well known to naturalists, live 

 in their larva state from four to five years, de- 

 vouring the roots of wheat, rye, oats, and other 

 vegetables. In some seasons they destroy whole 

 crops. Now it is upon these Elaterula that the 

 Mole lives, with other insects, worms {Vermes), 

 frogs (Bona), with slugs and snails (Limax and 

 Helix), the two last of which, it is well known, 

 are wholesale destroyers of vegetable life in its 

 young state. How absurd then is it to see these 

 poor Moles hanging gibbeted by the dozen, their 

 clever paddles stopped by cruel ignorance ! Well 

 may we exclaim — 



a 



Oh, ignorance ! where is thy blush ?" 



" Prior to my coming to reside in my parish," 

 says the Rev. G. Wilkins, of Wix, in the 

 " Farmer's Magazine," " the land I occupy had 

 been for many years in the occupation of a very 

 old man, who was a determined enemy to every 

 living creature of which he could not discover the 

 benefit ; and his enmity was especially directed 

 against the Mole. In my barn, as a kind of heir- 

 loom, hung a bundle of Mole-traps, which I at once 

 consigned to the fire. Then came the Mole-catcher 

 for his salary, as he caught my Moles by the year. 

 I paid him his money, and made him stare like a 

 lunatic when I told him he would do me a favor 

 if he would bring me a cart load of his Moles, and 

 turn them down in my fields. My fields being 

 near a village, where Rooks could not come, 

 swarmed with wireworms. Every year one-third 

 of my crops was quite destroyed by them. One 

 narrow field, surrounded with trees, was nearly 

 useless from them. But at length relief came. I 

 had long hoped to see my favorites the Mole-heaps ; 

 and at length, as if by a simultaneous agreement, 

 that little long field was full of Moles, which set 

 to manfully upon the destroyers of my crops, and 

 after some time completely destroyed them. They 

 then passed over into the next field, and the pests 

 in this field shared the same fate as the others. 

 I now verily believe I have not a wire-worm left 

 in my fields ; and as the Moles have entirely done 

 their work unsolicited, they have gone off to my 

 neighbors with the same good intention." 



The farmers on the Continent, particularly in 

 Belgium, are greatly averse to their being de- 



stroyed ; and I believe that the most unpopular 

 act in my respected father's life, was the introduc- 

 tion of the English Mole-trap into that country, 

 about the year 1834. Although upon a royal 

 domain, however, and at the command of Majesty 

 itself, all endeavors to extirpate them proved un- 

 availing; and the habits and wise judgment of a 

 gardening and agricultural people were yielded to 

 as an act of expediency. Happy I am to state 

 that both His Majesty and my father have repented 

 them of the evil, and are now numbered amongst 

 the merciful defenders of our useful Utile sub-cul- 

 tivator, the common Mole ! Thus, then, I hope I 

 have clearly defended " the little culprit " from 

 the second* and absurd charge brought against 

 him, to the satisfaction of his accusers ! 



The third charge brought against the tiny Mole 

 in an agricultural point of view, to those unac- 

 quainted with its usefulness, would lead many to 

 sign its death-w r arrant. Against this I will place 

 the following evidence from the pen of an agricul- 

 tural gentleman, in the " Agricultural Gazette," 

 for 1844, who says, "I have wet meadows, in 

 which they do me vast service. One of my 

 meadows was so wet, that no Mole worked into it, 

 but only burrowed on the surface, barely deep 

 enough to cover his body with the roots of the 

 grass and weeds, and this only in very dry hot 

 days of August — the only time when worms could 

 be found. I dug a few drains, and the next 

 summer found the Moles worked as deep as the 

 bottom of the drains, and into them. Another 

 year the drains were cut as deep as the fall would 

 allow, and the same result followed. My friends, 

 the Moles, opened scores of their channels into the 

 very bottom of these drains, and the meadow is 

 now firm and sound. In all my meadows, fi ding 

 the good they do, I never have them disturbed. 

 Only in April I send out a man to level their 

 hillocks, then roll them; and I never have any 

 complaint from the mowers. Depend upon it, 

 they are very beneficial to all lands, particu- 

 larly to wet bog soil. When four feet drains are 

 made with inch tiles, they cannot enter, but would 

 work at that depth in all directions, and be of the 

 greatest possible use." 



On some lands the drainage is wholly effected 

 by the Mole, so far that the farmer might save 

 himself some shillings, nay pounds, to the Mole- 

 catcher. Let us hope, then, that henceforward he 

 may be suffered to live in peace, and die of old 

 age, throughout the length and breadth of our 

 blessed land. To the farmer and the gardener 

 this matter is worthy of more consideration than 

 it has yet obtained. 



Among the other papers, is one on the 

 "Common Ring Snake," by Mr. Michael 

 Westcott. This is not written in an amiable 

 spirit, and appears to have originated in a 

 ) morbid desire to attack Mr. John Garland, 

 for some interesting observations of his on 

 a similar subject, published antecedently in 

 the "Naturalist." Mr. Garland has nothing 

 to fear from such an antagonist ; and will, no 

 doubt, continue to publish his observations 

 on Nature, sans pear, whenever he sees fit. 



In the " Retrospect," there are two crooked 

 matters set straight — the one referring to a 



