Domesticity in Animals. [December, 
plete domestication, so that they could be bred in the 
poultry-yard without the costly formalities of “ preserves” 
and game-keepers. But no ! So far they still remain half 
wild ; and though they may show some attachment to the 
person who feeds them, yet on the approach of a stranger 
they show none of the confidence of the domestic fowl, but 
at once flee for shelter to the nearest thicket. 
Here then we see that human effort, under strong induce- 
ment, has failed to domesticate a bird nearly allied to our 
ordinary poultry! What may take place in the course of 
successive generations cannot be foreseen. 
Turning again to America, we may ask why none of its 
aborigines had succeeded in domesticating the turkey ? 
With us, and with the white settlers across the Atlantic, it 
has proved itself quite susceptible of tameness. Were not 
the Mexicans sufficiently civilised to make so natural an 
attempt ? 
Further, why was the American bison (erroneously called 
buffalo) never brought into subjection by the Red Indians? 
It would have been of great service to them as a beast of 
burden as well as for food. It is unquestionably a member 
of the Ungulata, a ruminant animal, and thus belongs to the 
above-mentioned “ rasorial” type. Mr. Swainson, who 
always can find a way of escape, says : — “ Let us first look 
to that (the genus) of Bos, where we have the ox and the 
bison actually following each other in close affinity, and yet 
no two animals in their moral character can be more oppo- 
site : the one is the most useful, docile, and tameable of the 
brute creation, the other wild, revengeful, and showing an 
innate detestation of man. The ox is the typical example 
of the genus, the bison is the sub-typical.” Hence we are 
to believe that the Red Indians did not tame the bison 
because he is untameable. 
Mr. Swainson is here, as not unfrequently, at issue with 
fadts. The bison, even when wild, shows no disposition to 
attack man unless molested. He is, indeed, far less danger- 
ous than the half-wild cattle of Texas, of the Andean Para- 
mos, or of the Falkland Islands. The “ docility” of Bos 
taunts is, indeed, confined to the female sex. To an unarmed 
man in an open country there are few animals more danger- 
ous than the common bull ; and if he is above four years of 
age, he is exceedingly given to indulge in unprovoked 
attacks.* 
* The pugnacity of the bull was no doubt useful when he had to defend his 
family against wolves. But in a country like England it is surely the duty of 
cattle-breeders to attempt the development of a more peaceful strain. 
