152 
NATURE NOTES 
The Wellcome Physiological Research Laboratory . 
This sumptuously bound and illustrated pamphlet describes the excellent 
physiological work, especially in connection with anti-toxin serums, carried on at 
Brockwell Hall. 
Pictorial Postcards : Nature Series. 
Mr. Chas. Mosley, of the Museum Press, Lockwood, Huddersfield, sends us 
a specimen, drawn by Mr. Patteson, of a series which he is issuing at 13 for 6d., 
50 for is. 9(1. and 100 for 3s. 3d. 
Received : — The Butterflies and Moths of Europe, by W. F. Kirby, Parts 29 
and 30 ; The Victorian Naturalist and The American Boimist for May; The 
Parents' Review. The Animals' Friend , The Agricultural Economist and The 
Commonwealth , for June. 
NATURAL HISTORY NOTES. 
1 . Misquotation. With reference to misquotation on p. 125 of this 
month — “ delight to bark and bite for ’tis their nature to ” — an Oxford librarian 
observed in the Times last year that Dr. Watts, though not a great poet, was by 
no means an ungrammatical writer. Here, then, is the true version : 
“ Let dcgs delight to bark and bite, 
For God has made them so ; 
Let bears and lions growl and fight, 
For ’tis their nature too.” E. E. Kelly. 
2 . Is Nature Cruel ? — Mr. Edmund Thos. Daubeny gives a very interesting 
summary of facts in affirmation of this, and invites the readers of Nature Notes 
to discuss the subject in your journal. Mr. Daubeny contends that animals are 
conscious agents in the cruelty of Naiure. 
May I suggest that the term cruelty is inapplicable to Nature as a whole and 
to animals individually ? It seems to me that man only, as the denizen of a 
moral world, can be called cruel. It may be admitted that certain domesticated 
animals, through association with us, have seemed to imbibe a degree of moral 
sense, but it is difficult to see how animals in a state of nature, as in the instances 
adduced, can be called conscious agents of cruelty. 
Man, alas, continues for sport and food to imitate many of the ways of 
animals, without the justification which may reasonably be extended to the 
carnivora. Thomas Pole. 
3 . — I have read the Rev. E. T. Daubeny’s article on the cruelty of Nature 
in this month’s Nature Notes with interest, and although I cannot say that 
Nature is not cruel, yet I do not think it is nearly so bad as the Rev. E. T. 
Daubeny paints it. Passing over the remarks relating to birds, which I am 
afraid I cannot question as I have not paid much attention to that part of the 
question, we come to those relating to insects, spiders and worms. I believe 
that the invertebrata do not feel pain in the same degree as man does, even 
if they do at all, for the following reasons : insects, more especially beetles 
( Coleoptera ), have been known, after having been subjected to the fumes of a 
cyanide killing bottle, and after having been pinned and set, to have revived 
and made a meal off some of their dead companions. Mutilated insects have 
also been kept alive for several hours or even days, they all the time feeding 
well. If the larvse of insects felt pain in the same degree as man does, is it 
likely that they would be able to live through all that which they have to 
undergo when stung by an ichneumon ? If anything of the kind happened to 
man, would he not die before many days of suffering bad passed? Besides, 
many animals have one of the known senses missing, some are blind, others 
are deaf, and we cannot say that all animals have the sense of smell and taste, 
so that it would not be very surprising if the invertebrata did not have the power 
of feeling developed. 
