34 
NATURE NOTES. 
has not only survived the attacks of time and the ravages of the “restorer,” but 
has been occupied by a succession of appreciative tenants. It is rarely that “ the 
fitness of things ” produces such a desirable coincidence as the occupancy of 
Gilbert White’s house by Gilbert White’s best biographer and editor, Professor 
Bell. Our readers will be pleased to'know that the good traditions are kept up 
by the present occupier of “ The Wakes,” General Parr, who is a Selbornian, 
not only in name but in deed. The following interesting letter was sent to us by 
Mrs. William Chase Parr, on December 30th, 1890, but has not been printed 
before for the reason explained above : — 
“ Some of your readers may, perhaps, be interested to hear that since this 
severe weather has set in we have thrown out twice a day a large plateful of 
scraps of meat and potatoes, as well as quantities of bread, in front of our dining- 
room, originally Gilbert White’s ‘ summer parlour.’ At first only the usual 
familiar robins and sparrows came, but now we generally have in addition four or 
five blackbirds, two thrushes, three or four starlings, five or six chaffinches, a 
couple of bullfinches, and one or two pied wagtails — great frequenters of our lawn 
in mild weather. A little wren comes sometimes, and this morning we had three 
examples of the greater titmouse. A couple of the latter frequent the thick 
stems of ivy growing up the old part of the house. A few days ago I hung a bit 
of bacon by a string out of the casement window of the school-room, formerly 
Gilbert White’s bedroom. The two little titmice were seen eagerly pecking at 
it, and it soon disappeared. We also have a robin who has lived for the last fort- 
night very happily in I he conservatory, where he is daily fed. A little cole 
titmouse was also there for some days ; we watched him climbing about the 
chrysanthemums searching for insects. Four or five winters ago we had three 
robins in the conservatory for several weeks ; two of them became so tame that, 
when a plate of crumbs was brought in, they would at once fly down, and perch 
on the plate or the hand, and begin pecking away. The three quarrelled con- 
stantly, till one day, when the gardener left the door open, one of them flew out ; 
the remaining two then lived in peace and quietness together until the mild 
weather came, when they, too, bid us good-bye.” 
Toads as Purifiers. — Your correspondent, Miss W. M. E. Fowler, 
in the December number of Nature Notes, in an article on “ Frogs and Toads,” 
speaks of a superstitious belief that “ frogs take in all the poison from water, and 
that if one be placed in impure water it will in a short time render it fit to drink.” 
This reminds me of what an old woman in this parish told me many years ago. 
Speaking of her younger days, she said : “I was always a very tender-hearted 
girl, and never could abear to see a boy take delight in a toad with a stick ; 
besides, I have always understood they are very useful creatures, and help to 
make the water good, and that the reason why the Irish are so fierce is because 
they have no toads in Ireland to make the water pure.” This remedy for “ the 
ills of Ireland ” has not yet been suggested “in another place,” I think. Does 
not the common belief that toads spit poison arise from the fact that the lumps in 
their skin contain an acid that will make a dog foam at the mouth slightly if he 
bite one ? 
Costock Rectory , Loughborough. C. S. Millard. 
“ A New Theory of Floral Structure.”— No papers in Nature Notes 
have been more weighty and interesting than those of Professor G. Henslowq and 
it is not without trepidation that I venture to raise a question respecting his last 
contribution. Professor Ilenslow writes (Nature Notes, p. 9): “ If we thought 
the flower made the honey-glands in anticipation of an insect coming, we should 
fall into the old mistake of what is called teleology. Hence there is no alter- 
native but that the insect itself is the direct cause of the secretion.” Now, I hope 
I should not be perverting these words — which I have certainly no wish to do — 
if I paraphrased them thus : — We may not say “honey was placed in the flower, 
hence the visit of the insect,” but we may, and we must say, “ the insect (or 
many different kinds of insects) so persistently and pertinaciously probed and 
searched the flower (or several different flowers) for (ex hypothesi) non-existent 
juices, that a fixed habit of secreting honey was formed in all these flowers.” But 
if we may not say that the honey brought the insect, on pain of being found 
teleological ; if we can see no motive for the different insects’ systematic visits 
