therefore how is it that these little eels get no 

 larger in their long and tedious journey, inter- 

 rupted as it is by numerous and almost insur- 

 mountable obstacles before they could reach the 

 little ditch, three quarters of a mile long, which 

 would conduct them to our pond ? and last of all, 

 after this long and tedious journey, within 100 

 yards of their destination, they would have to 

 climb four waterfalls and a perpendicular sluice- 

 board. It appears to me that they should have 

 grown much larger than a common tobacco-pipe 

 during that time ; but I will leave this point to 

 ' H. G.' to explain." This is so fairly put, that 

 I will tell what I have seen, hoping that this 

 will be a sufficient explanation. In June, 1850, 1 

 happened to go down to the bank of the river 

 Kibble, and there I saw a column of small eels 

 steadily making their way up the stream. I 

 should suppose there might be about 50 in every 

 lineal yard (for they kept pretty close to the 

 bank, apparently because they met with less 

 resistance from the stream), and without pre- 

 tending to accuracy, I supposed they travelled at 

 the rate of a mile per hour. This was about 5 

 o'clock in the afternoon, and I went to look at 

 them again about 9 in the evening. They were 

 still going in one unbroken column. How long 

 they had been going when I first saw them, and 

 how long they continued to go after my second 

 visit, I don't know, but many thousands, perhaps 

 millions, must have passed on that day. At this 

 rate, they would have required little more than 

 two days to reach " G. H.'s " pond, 50 miles 

 from the sea; but he says they had to pass 

 over three or four waterfalls, and a perpendicular 

 sluice-board . If these waterfalls and the sluice- 

 board were covered with moss, they would climb 

 them as readily as a cat does a ladder. I have 

 seen them in swarms at a perpendicular weir here, 

 wiriding their way through the damp moss, with 

 which the stones are covered ; but this was not 

 all. Where there was no moss, the little things 

 seemed to have the power of adhering to the per- 

 pendicular face of the stones, like so many snails. 

 I must not omit to remark that, although they 

 seemed to choose the margin of the stream for 

 the sake of easier travelling, yet they took care 

 to keep in the stream, as I had a nice opportunity 

 of remarking. At the point where I first observed 

 them, the tail grit of a water-wheel had its junc- 

 tion with the river, but being Sunday there was 

 no current there. Not a single eel took its course 

 up the tail grit, although the water was deeper 

 there than where they went. The water being 

 low and perfectly clear, I could trace their course, 

 both above and below the place where I stood, 

 without any difficulty. If we allow that they 

 travelled a mile in the hour, and that the ob- 

 struction of the waterfalls and the sluice-board 

 required as long to get over as all the rest of 

 the journey, this would enable them to reach 

 " G. H.'s " pond in four days from the sea; and 

 from what I have seen of their ability to sur- 

 mount such obstructions, I am quite convinced 

 that they would travel that distance in the time. 

 But say they were a week; they would not grow 

 much in that time, particularly if they had been 

 travelling without food the whole of the time, 

 and that they must have done so is proved to my 

 mind by their keeping in column: for if they 



had dispersed to seek for food, by what con- 

 trivance were they marshalled into line again to 

 enable them to proceed? Now, the place where 

 I saw them is 40 miles from the sea, although, 

 perhaps, not that distance from salt water. 

 " Tav ' says, that it is no proof that eels are 

 bred in fresh water, because they may be found 

 in ponds having no communication with a river; 

 The proof required is ab ovo. If he waits for 

 this proof, I fear he will have to wait some time ; 

 for I fancy no one but Mr. Boccius ever saw 

 the ova op eels, and he will not condescend 

 to enlighten us on the subject; but at the same time 

 I admit, that finding them there is no proof that 

 they were bred there, inasmuch as I have myself 

 stocked such ponds for my friends; and what I 

 have done may be done by others. " Tav 

 says further, " There is also room for inquiry 

 into a rather curious subject — Do eels after hav- 

 ing gone to the sea for spawning (?) ever 

 return to fresh water? " In reply to this I can 

 only say, that no trace of such a migration is ever 

 seen here; and I think, if it existed at all, I 

 should have observed it, for the following reasons : 

 — The Kibble here supplies a large mill, the 

 water-wheels of which are 150 horse power, there- 

 fore when they are at work in the daytime the 

 whole force of the river is frequently passing 

 through the mill lead (grit), and the bed of the 

 river between the tail grit and the weir (two- 

 thirds of a mile) is suddenly left dry, except a 

 few pools; if there were a shoal of eels between 

 these two points, it would have been seen at one 

 time or another, and this has never happened so 

 far as I know; it may be said that they migrate 

 singly; but they don't do so in their first migra- 

 tion, and so far as I am aware, it is not the habit 

 of any animal to do so. Herrings, pilchards, 

 smelts, flounders, sturgeon, bisons, antelopes, 

 woodcocks, swallows, fieldfares, locusts, and even 

 butterflies, congregate together previous to migra- 

 tion.— -T. G., Clitherbe: 



On the Artficial Incubation of Eggs Let me 



call your attention to the very interesting subject 

 of hatching eggs by Cantelo's Incubator, or hot 

 water. You are aware that the principle of ar- 

 tificial hatching is not new, having been practised 

 in the earliest ages ; but it has of late years been 

 much improved on. My object now, is to point 

 out the defects in Cantelo's Incubator, and to 

 show how greater advantages might be derived. 

 The drawbacks attached to the Incubator are 

 first, the expense. The cost is at least sixpence 

 per day. Secondly, some person must be con- 

 stantly present to attend the fire. Thirdly, the 

 costliness of the machines, the cheapest being £21. 

 Fourthly, the difficulty of procuring charcoal in 

 some country towns. These serious disadvan- 

 tages have prevented many persons from giving 

 the system a fair trial. Now, / have thought of 

 a plan whereby many thousand head of poultry 

 might be successfully reared at a very trifling 

 cost. It is however fair to state, that the pro- 

 cess can only be carried on where there is an 

 engine at constant work; the enginemen could 

 then attend to the apparatus, which will not re- 

 quire more of them than ten minutes per day. 

 A machine capable of holding 600 eggs can be 



