1883.] 
{ 299 ) 
CORRESPONDENCE. 
*,* The Editor does not hold himself responsible for statements of fads or 
opinions expressed in Correspondence, or in Articles bearing the signature 
of their respective authors. 
* DO SNAKES SWALLOW THEIR YOUNG? 
To the Editor of the Journal of Science . 
Sir, — In the “ Standard ” of March 5th I find the following with 
reference to Miss Catherine C. Hopley’s book on “ Snakes,” just 
published : — “ We are rather glad to find that she believes in 
serpents swallowing their young for protection, and she has some 
very curious reflections on the subjeCt which might be pursued 
further.” And “ Land and Water ” of February 24th, in speaking 
of it as a “ vexed question,” said— “ We are inclined to agree 
with Miss Hopley. We are aware that some high authorities 
still look upon the case as not yet satisfactorily proved. We 
hope the evidence brought forward in Chapter XXVII. will set a 
fresh number of observers on the alert, and that the faCt of 
ophidian mothers continuing their care over their baby offspring 
may be made clear to all.” 
I thought that I had settled this question in “ Contributions to 
Natural History, &c.,” published at Edinburgh in 1875, anc * again 
with an Appendix in 1880. It would have been interesting if 
“ Land and Water ” had told us who the “ high authorities ” are 
that “ still look upon the case as not yet satisfactorily proved,” 
and of the kind of evidence they want ; and why other observa- 
tions should be made and printed, while mine — which are so 
minute, so scientific, and I think so conclusive — should be 
treated as if they had no existence.” On that head I wrote in 
“ Contributions, &c.,” as follows : — 
“ A scientific or even common-sense naturalist will not neces- 
sarily stoop so low as to demand ocular proof of snakes swal- 
lowing their young. He ascertains that vipers pass their young 
with a covering on them, — the original egg attenuated to the 
last degree,- — which breaks as it leaves the mother, or imme- 
diately after it touches the ground ; and are killed with young 
inside of them, sometimes upwards of 7 inches long, and divested 
of a covering ; and he concludes at once that the young were 
swallowed. And his opinion is confirmed by the fadt of oviparous 
X 2 
