76 



KIDD'S OWN JOURNAL. 



delicate? I have only just become a subscriber 

 to your most interesting Journal, and therefore, 

 perhaps^ am asking a question the solution of 

 which has been before given. — Mary W. 



[We refer you to our " Treatise on the 

 Canary" (see vol. 1). In this you will find all 

 you wish to know. Some German canaries are 

 very splendid songsters. We have "one" 

 to whose voice we should never be tired of 

 listening. Such execution we have rarely met 

 with. It is far beyond any power of description. 

 All canaries, generally speaking, are hardy 

 birds; but they should be carefully kept from 

 draughts, and affectionately tended during the 

 spring and fall of the year. The York canaries 

 are good sougsters, but not handsome. Their 

 constitutions are like cast iron.] 



" Love me, love my Dog'* — No, I thank you ! 

 It is impossible for any one to be offended with 

 you, Mr. Editor; because I feel sure that all your 

 remarks are intended to benefit the public; but 

 what an article was that of yours about dogs in 

 No. 29 ! Why, you have put your poor head 

 into chancery! May it come out safely again, 

 and so be chronicled as " a remarkable escape! " 

 There is no gainsaying the truth of your obser- 

 vations, and I hope they will carry weight. It 

 is, I confess, most horribly " disgusting " to see 

 great girls, little girls, and grown-up women 

 (all called modest) so unblushingly and im- 

 modestly fondling their dogs in public as well 

 as private. Were the same fact related in black 

 and white of any other country than our own, 

 we should be positively shocked to read it; yet 

 can we tamely and even carelessly look upon 

 what we dare not read! "Use" indeed "is 

 second nature," and it shows how easily we 

 become reconciled to what pleases our fancy. I 

 myself witness sights of the description you 

 allude to constantly, more particularly among 

 "carriage ladies," whose dogs seem the only 

 privileged creatures to lick the faces of their 

 mistresses. ( What a treat for the husbands .') 

 In the streets, too, may be seen dogs led by a 

 string; and also at our bazaars and other places 

 of public resort. Here are these atrocities 

 against common decorum openly and shamelessly 

 practised day by day. Again raise your voice, 

 Mr. Editor, as you have already dene, and the 

 real value of a paper like yours will be speedily 

 appreciated. — A Younger Brother. 



[The source whence the above letter emanates, 

 is to us a pleasing proof that our bow, bent at 

 random, has carried a shaft into many a fair 

 bosom in high quarters, leaving its mark behind 

 it. This is well. Our observations are general, 

 not particular. We again venture to express 

 our unqualified disgust at the practices hinted at. 

 Our informant tells us, indeed we were previously 

 aware of it, that in high families dogs are posi- 

 tively half starved — because their breath should 

 be sweet when they lick their mistress's lips! 

 Meat is positively forbidden, and any servant 

 giving it them would be instantly discharged ! ! 

 Sponge cake, cream, and sweet biscuits, are the 

 usual diet; and the dogs, at first ravenous for 

 their natural food, gradually get inured to their 

 pampered state of existence! ! Our love for 

 dogs is too notorious for us to be even suspected 



of writing with an unfair bias against them. 

 For fidelity, affection, companionship, and eter- 

 nal constancy, commend us to a dog, — aye in 

 preference to our own race, — but still let natural 

 proprieties be observed, say we; and all things 

 kept in their proper places We do love our fair 

 countrywomen; and it is this that makes us elo- 

 quent against all that would detract from their 

 praise. We may be singular, we admit; but if 

 we are to enjoy the privileges of our sex, 

 let not the said privileges be first monopolised by 

 a dog, — fed on sponge cake, cream, and sw r eet 

 biscuit ! With us, it is aut Casar aut nullus. 

 We can have no rival near our throne.] 



The Caterpillar and the Professor. — Dear Mr. 

 Editor — Although the heat is excessive, such is 

 my regard for your Journal that I have per- 

 spired through it with undeviating regularity. 

 I am induced to-day to take up my entomo- 

 logical pen, in consequence of a contribution by 

 your correspondent " Nannette." It is all very 

 well for you, Mr. Editor, to sing her praises as 

 " dear Nannette." I will bet my life she is a 

 brunette. [We hope so ; our regard for her will 

 be even greater, if possible, than before.] Like 

 yourself, Mr. Editor, I dearly love the name of 

 " Nannette ;" and this very circumstance in- 

 duces me to set her right on a point where her 

 innocent fingers have committed a slight but no 

 doubt unintentional error. Smerinthus Pinastri 

 (see p. 410) should have been written Sphinx 

 Pinastri. He is really and truly an honest old 

 •Sphinx, and has nothing of the Smerinthus about 

 him. Gastropacha pini should also be Bombyx 

 pityocampa. [" Nannette " must not be blamed 

 for this, really. She only copied from a printed 

 book.] It is odd indeed, Mr. Editor, if I do not 

 know my own cousin. They certainly were, 

 formerly, called Gastropacha pini by good Mr. 

 Ochrenheimer; but have long since had the good 

 sense to call themselves simply Bombyx \ and to 

 compensate for the loss of the elegant name of 

 Gastropacha, have assumed that of Pityocampa. 

 At the preser.t day, I am most assuredly of 

 opinion that Sphinx Pinastri is rather scarce 

 than otherwise in Germany ; and I imagine 

 " Nannette" would have some difficulty in 

 proving the assertion of the author from whom 

 she quotes. It is otherwise however with Pityo- 

 campa. He is a terrible dog; beautiful to look 

 at, but a perfect Diabolus to handle. Let "Nan- 

 nette " try it ! As for destructiveness, that qua- 

 lification has no limit. Had Dr. Gall examined 

 his cranium, he never could have forgotten it. 

 He devours furiously, but I must say I have not 

 remarked the distinct crackling noise alluded to 

 by Nannette. But I forget what I am about, 

 Mr. Editor; and beg yourself, or some entomo- 

 logical friend will send a solution to the follow- 

 ing question. It is only to encourage a love for 

 entomology that the Old Bombyx writes as he is 

 moved. 1 once knew a very superior gentleman, 

 amiable, kind, learned, delightful; esteemed 

 and beloved both far and near. He was an ex- 

 cellent and valued friend of mine, Mr. Editor. 

 The world, in these days, sees few like him. He 

 was moreover a very scientific man, and did well 

 wear his honors (LL.D., &c.) Alas ! I now see 

 his silvery locks, — but the good Professor is no 



