$k items jflatnraltal : 



A Penny Weekly Magazine of Natural History. 



No. 86. 



JULY 2nd, 1881 



Vol. 



LIFE HISTORIES. 



BTtHE two papers, smt in response to 

 J oar offer of a prize, for the best 

 SLife History " of a British Mammal 

 have been criticised by some of our 

 readers as we requested. Tin- general 

 »pinioii is that neither paper can 

 properly be called a " Life History." 

 ff Mr. Gregson will excuse us using his 

 lame we will quote his remarks on one 

 ■the papers, because it is exactly what 

 ve want to impress on our young 

 readers. He says: — 



-£n No. 82 of the Young Naturalist is the 

 Bod Essay on a British Mammal, the Mole 

 To//"' Eurojma j. Here we have a very nice 

 io<hst paper on ;m animal little is known 

 bout, though the essayist says it has been 

 are fully studied by many naturalists. Well, 

 ave not seen these careful studies. 1 have 

 een quite a lot of twaddle, copied and recopied, 

 ut what you want is exactly what your essayist 

 Ms you of his own knowledge (I suspect) — 

 ith the addition of its Life History, how it 

 ■plates, how long it carries its young, how 

 lany young at a birth, at what age it breeds, 

 hat it eats, what are its uses to man, &c. , &c. 

 [any practical naturalists do know a little 

 bout the mole — a very little — and perhaps I 

 lay say it is the most useful animal upon a 

 adly drained farm that we have, because it 

 lways makes its runs empty themselves into 



the very lowest part of the land, and its nest is 

 placed in the highest portion of the ground ; 

 thus he not only helps by his mole hills to 

 refresh the land, bnt he admits oxygen into the 

 earth through his drains after he has drained 

 the land, lint it is not for me to give the life 

 history of the mole, it is sufficient if it is 

 pointed out to our young friends what is 

 wanted in an essay or Life History of an 

 animal to win the prize offered for the best 

 Life History by the Editors of the Young 

 Naturalist. Neither of these papers deserve 

 the name of a "Life History," consequently 

 no prize should be given. Let both try again. 

 No. 2 is by far the best article, but every paper 

 should describe the animal, size, shape, length 

 of nose, ears, legs, tail, and particularly mouth, 

 teeth, &c, in addition to the conditions 

 named before, if we could get a few young 

 observers to-do these things, all the nonsense 

 in our books, would soon be superseded by 

 actual observation, and our young men would 

 take first rank at once. The only conditions 

 being, there must not be any speculations in 

 Natural History. Tell us aula what you know. 

 and let somebody else fill in the desiderated 

 knowledge when it is obtained." 



We do not know that we could say 

 what is quoted above, more forcibly, or 

 in fewer words, and we particularly 

 direct our readers attention to the 

 suggestions as to what is needed in a 

 "Life History." There is far too 

 much truth in the remark that twaddle 



