1882 .] 
Analyses of Books. 
553 
The Field Naturalist and Scientific Student. No. 2, July, 1882. 
Manchester : A. Heywood and Son. 
This new journal began well, and is going on better. In the 
present issue we notice some very interesting fadts on the habits 
of animals. Mr. W. J. V. Vandenbergh gives a case of a “tame 
rabbit devouring earth-worms with evident relish.” This, after 
all, is the less surprising if we refledi that other rodents — such 
as the rat, the mouse, and the squirrel — not only accept animal 
food, but attack and devour such creatures as they can master. 
Parrots, also, it appears in another paragraph, are liable to be- 
come carnivorous. Not to speak of the kea (. Nestor notahilis) of 
New Zealand, but according to Dr. Buller “ a whole fraternity 
of caged parrots took to cannibalism, killing and devouring each 
other, a Platycercus semitorquatus taking the initiative.” There 
were four species, and, what is the more remarkable, the birds 
had lived in peace together for nearly two years. It thus appears 
that there is no such distindt boundary between carnivorous and 
frugivorous animals as closet naturalists, especially those of the 
Old School, would make out. There are, we may say, carnivora 
de jure and carnivora de facto , the former doubtless especially 
qualified for an animal diet, but the latter being easily led, by 
very trifling changes in their conditions of life, to turn predatory. 
It must also be remembered that many creatures which are 
carnivorous in their adult state become vegetarians when mature, 
whilst others — such as the robber-fly ( Erax apicalis), so justly 
detested by bee-masters in some parts of America — reverse the 
process. 
The Rev. M. G. Watkins raises the question “ Do fishes feel 
pain ?” It is said that “ a large trout, taken in Loch Awe with 
an artificial minnow, had no fewer than five other minnow 
tackles, all bristling with hooks, hanging round its mouth.” This 
is a subject by no means cleared up. Some close observers 
maintain that, as in fishes, the mouth is the principal organ of 
touch, we can scarcely conceive of it as insensible. 
Some strange instances of mimetic resemblances and mimicry 
in animals are given by Mr. J. E. Peal, partly from the “ Scien- 
tific Roll.” It is said — “ The tiger imitates the whistle of the 
large Sambur deer (to call it) so closely that only a trained ear 
can tell the difference. The leopard also imitates the smaller 
deer. The crocodile’s eye and nose, floating on our muddy 
waters, exadily resemble the lumps of dirty foam so common 
here.” 
The “ Field Naturalist” is doing a useful work, and has our 
good wishes. 
2 O 
VOL* IV. (THIRD SERIES). 
