Chapter I: Domestic Dogs and Cats (2)

It has already been remarked that dogs differ in the degree to
which their feet are webbed. In dogs of the Newfoundland breed,
which are eminently aquatic in their habits, the skin, according to
Isidore Geoffroy,[78] extends to the third phalanges whilst in
ordinary dogs it extends only to the second. In two Newfoundland
dogs which I examined, when the toes were stretched apart and
viewed on the under side, the skin extended in a nearly straight
line between the outer margins of the balls of the toes; whereas,
in two terriers of distinct sub-breeds, the skin viewed in the same
manner was deeply scooped out. In Canada there is a dog which is
peculiar to the country and common there, and this has “half-webbed
feet and is fond of the water.”[79] English otter-hounds are said
to have webbed feet: a friend examined for me the feet of two, in
comparison with the feet of some harriers and bloodhounds; he found
the skin variable in extent in all, but more developed in the
otter-hounds than in the others.[80] As aquatic animals which
belong to quite different orders have webbed feet, there can be no
doubt that this structure would be serviceable to dogs that
frequent the water. We may confidently infer that no man ever
selected his water-dogs by the extent to which the skin was
developed between their toes; but what he does, is to preserve and
breed from those individuals which hunt best in the water, or best
retrieve wounded game, and thus he unconsciously selects dogs with
feet slightly better webbed. The effects of use from the frequent
stretching apart of the toes will likewise aid in the result. Man
thus closely imitates Natural Selection. We have an excellent
illustration of this same process in North America, where,
according to Sir J. Richardson,[81] all the wolves, foxes, and
aboriginal domestic dogs have their feet broader than in the
corresponding species of the Old World, and “well calculated for
running on the snow” Now, in these Arctic regions, the life or
death of every animal will often depend on its success in hunting
over the snow when soft; and this will in part depend on the feet
being broad; yet they must not be so broad as to interfere with the
activity of the animal when the ground is sticky, or with its power
of burrowing holes, or with other necessary habits of life.

As changes in domestic breeds which take place so slowly are not to
be noticed at any one period, whether due to the selection of
individual variations or of differences resulting from crosses, are
most important in understanding the origin of our domestic
productions, and likewise in throwing indirect light on the changes
effected under nature, I will give in detail such cases as I have
been able to collect. Lawrence,[82] who paid particular attention
to the history of the foxhound, writing in 1829, says that between
eighty and ninety years before “an entirely new foxhound was raised
through the breeder’s art,” the ears of the old southern hound
being reduced, the bone and bulk lightened, the waist increased in
length, and the stature somewhat added to. It is believed that this
was effected by a cross with a greyhound. With respect to this
latter dog, Youatt,[83] who is generally cautious in his
statements, says that the greyhound within the last fifty years,
that is before the commencement of the present century, “assumed a
somewhat different character from that which he once possessed. He
is now distinguished by a beautiful symmetry of form, of which he
could not once boast, and he has even superior speed to that which
he formerly exhibited. He is no longer used to struggle with deer,
but contends with his fellows over a shorter and speedier course.”
An able writer[84] believes that our English greyhounds are the
descendants, _progressively improved,_ of the large rough
greyhounds which existed in Scotland so early as the third century.
A cross at some former period with the Italian greyhound has been
suspected; but this seems hardly probable, considering the
feebleness of this latter breed. Lord Orford, as is well-known,
crossed his famous greyhounds, which failed in courage, with a
bulldog—this breed being chosen from being erroneously supposed to
be deficient in the power of scent; “after the sixth or seventh
generation,” says Youatt, “there was not a vestige left of the form
of the bulldog, but his courage and indomitable perseverance
remained.”

Youatt infers, from a comparison of an old picture of King
Charles’s spaniels with the living dog, that “the breed of the
present day is materially altered for the worse:” the muzzle has
become shorter, the forehead more prominent, and the eyes larger;
the changes in this case have probably been due to simple
selection. The setter, as this author remarks in another place, “is
evidently the large spaniel improved to his present peculiar size
and beauty, and taught another way of marking his game. If the form
of the dog were not sufficiently satisfactory on this point, we
might have recourse to history:” he then refers to a document dated
1685 bearing on this subject, and adds that the pure Irish setter
shows no signs of a cross with the pointer, which some authors
suspect has been the case with the English setter. The bulldog is
an English breed, and as I hear from Mr. G. R. Jesse,[85] seems to
have originated from the mastiff since the time of Shakspeare; but
certainly existed in 1631, as shown by Prestwick Eaton’s letters.
There can be no doubt that the fancy bulldogs of the present day,
now that they are not used for bull-baiting, have become greatly
reduced in size, without any express intention on the part of the
breeder. Our pointers are certainly descended from a Spanish breed,
as even their present names, Don, Ponto, Carlos, etc., show; it is
said that they were not known in England before the Revolution in
1688;[86] but the breed since its introduction has been much
modified, for Mr. Borrow, who is a sportsman and knows Spain
intimately well, informs me that he has not seen in that country
any breed “corresponding in figure with the English pointer; but
there are genuine pointers near Xeres which have been imported by
English gentlemen.” A nearly parallel case is offered by the
Newfoundland dog, which was certainly brought into England from
that country, but which has since been so much modified that, as
several writers have observed, it does not now closely resemble any
existing native dog in Newfoundland.[87]

These several cases of slow and gradual changes in our English dogs possess some interest; for though the changes have generally, but not invariably, been caused by one or two crosses with a distinct breed, yet we may feel sure, from the well-known extreme variability of crossed breeds, that rigorous and long-continued selection must have been practised, in order to improve them in a definite manner. As soon as any strain or family became slightly improved or better adapted to alter circumstances, it would tend to supplant the older and less improved strains. For instance, as soon as the old foxhound was improved by a cross with the greyhound, or by simple selection, and assumed its present character—and the change was probably desired owing to the increased fleetness of our hunters—it rapidly spread throughout the country, and is now everywhere nearly uniform. But the process of improvement is still going on for every one tries to improve his strain by occasionally procuring dogs from the best kennels. Through this process of gradual substitution the old English hound has been lost; and so it has been with the Irish wolf-dog, the old English bulldog, and several other breeds, such as the alaunt, as I am informed by Mr. Jesse. But the extinction of former breeds is apparently aided by another cause; for whenever a breed is kept in scanty numbers, as at present with the bloodhound, it is reared with some difficulty, apparently from the evil effects of long-continued close interbreeding. As several breeds of the dog have been slightly but sensibly modified within so short a period as the last one or two centuries, by the selection of the best individuals, modified in many cases by crosses with other breeds; and as we shall hereafter see that the breeding of dogs was attended to in ancient times, as it still is by savages, we may conclude that we have in selection, even if only occasionally practised, a potent means of modification.

DOMESTIC CATS.

Cats have been domesticated in the East from an ancient period; Mr.
Blyth informs me that they are mentioned in a Sanskrit writing 2000
years old, and in Egypt their antiquity is known to be even
greater, as shown by monumental drawings and their mummied bodies.
These mummies, according to De Blainville,[88] who has particularly
studied the subject, belong to no less than three species, namely,
_F. caligulata,_ bubastes, and _chaus._ The two former species are
said to be still found, both wild and domesticated, in parts of
Egypt. _F. caligulata_ presents a difference in the first inferior
milk molar tooth, as compared with the domestic cats of Europe,
which makes De Blainville conclude that it is not one of the
parent-forms of our cats. Several naturalists, as Pallas, Temminck,
Blyth, believe that domestic cats are the descendants of several
species commingled: it is certain that cats cross readily with
various wild species, and it would appear that the character of the
domestic breeds has, at least in some cases, been thus affected.
Sir W. Jardine has no doubt that, “in the north of Scotland, there
has been occasional crossing with our native species (_F.
sylvestris_), and that the result of these crosses has been kept in
our houses. I have seen,” he adds, “many cats very closely
resembling the wild cat, and one or two that could scarcely be
distinguished from it.” Mr. Blyth[89] remarks on this passage, “but
such cats are never seen in the southern parts of England; still,
as compared with any Indian tame cat, the affinity of the ordinary
British cat to _F. sylvestris_ is manifest; and due I suspect to
frequent intermixture at a time when the tame cat was first
introduced into Britain and continued rare, while the wild species
was far more abundant than at present.” In Hungary, Jeitteles[90]
was assured on trustworthy authority that a wild male cat crossed
with a female domestic cat, and that the hybrids long lived in a
domesticated state. In Algiers the domestic cat has crossed with
the wild cat (_F. lybica_) of that country.[91] In South Africa as
Mr. E. Layard informs me, the domestic cat intermingles freely with
the wild _F. caffra_; he has seen a pair of hybrids which were
quite tame and particularly attached to the lady who brought them
up; and Mr. Fry has found that these hybrids are fertile. In India
the domestic cat, according to Mr. Blyth, has crossed with four
Indian species. With respect to one of these species, _F. chaus,_
an excellent observer, Sir W. Elliot, informs me that he once
killed, near Madras, a wild brood, which were evidently hybrids
from the domestic cat; these young animals had a thick lynx-like
tail and the broad brown bar on the inside of the forearm
characteristic of _F. chaus._ Sir W. Elliot adds that he has often
observed this same mark on the forearms of domestic cats in India.
Mr. Blyth states that domestic cats coloured nearly like _ F.
chaus,_ but not resembling that species in shape, abound in Bengal;
he adds, “such a colouration is utterly unknown in European cats,
and the proper tabby markings (pale streaks on a black ground,
peculiarly and symmetrically disposed), so common in English cats,
are never seen in those of India.” Dr. D. Short has assured Mr.
Blyth[92] that, at Hansi, hybrids between the common cat and _F.
ornata_ (or _ torquata_) occur, “and that many of the domestic cats
of that part of India were undistinguishable from the wild _F.
ornata._” Azara states, but only on the authority of the
inhabitants, that in Paraguay the cat has crossed with two native
species. From these several cases we see that in Europe, Asia,
Africa, and America, the common cat, which lives a freer life than
most other domesticated animals, has crossed with various wild
species; and that in some instances the crossing has been
sufficiently frequent to affect the character of the breed.

Whether domestic cats have descended from several distinct species, or have only been modified by occasional crosses, their fertility, as far as is known, is unimpaired. The large Angora or Persian cat is the most distinct in structure and habits of all the domestic breeds; and is believed by Pallas, but on no distinct evidence, to be descended from the _F. manul_ of middle Asia; and I am assured by Mr. Blyth that the Angora cat breeds freely with Indian cats, which, as we have already seen, have apparently been much crossed with _F. chaus._ In England half-bred Angora cats are perfectly fertile with one another.

Within the same country we do not meet with distinct races of the
cat, as we do of dogs and of most other domestic animals; though
the cats of the same country present a considerable amount of
fluctuating variability. The explanation obviously is that, from
their nocturnal and rambling habits, indiscriminate crossing cannot
without much trouble be prevented. Selection cannot be brought into
play to produce distinct breeds, or to keep those distinct which
have been imported from foreign lands. On the other hand, in
islands and in countries completely separated from each other, we
meet with breeds more or less distinct; and these cases are worth
giving, showing that the scarcity of distinct races in the same
country is not caused by a deficiency of variability in the animal.
The tailless cats of the Isle of Man are said to differ from common
cats not only in the want of a tail, but in the greater length of
their hind legs, in the size of their heads, and in habits. The
Creole cat of Antigua, as I am informed by Mr. Nicholson, is
smaller, and has a more elongated head, than the British cat. In
Ceylon, as Mr. Thwaites writes to me, every one at first notices
the different appearance of the native cat from the English animal;
it is of small size, with closely lying hairs; its head is small,
with a receding forehead; but the ears are large and sharp;
altogether it has what is there called a “low-caste” appearance.
Rengger[93] says that the domestic cat, which has been bred for 300
years in Paraguay, presents a striking difference from the European
cat; it is smaller by a fourth, has a more lanky body, its hair is
short, shining, scanty and lies close, especially on the tail: he
adds that the change has been less at Ascension, the capital of
Paraguay, owing to the continual crossing with newly imported cats;
and this fact well illustrates the importance of separation. The
conditions of life in Paraguay appear not to be highly favourable
to the cat, for, though they have run half-wild, they do not become
thoroughly feral, like so many other European animals. In another
part of South America, according to Roulin,[94] the introduced cat
has lost the habit of uttering its hideous nocturnal howl. The Rev.
W.D. Fox purchased a cat in Portsmouth, which he was told came from
the coast of Guinea; its skin was black and wrinkled, fur
bluish-grey and short, its ears rather bare, legs long, and whole
aspect peculiar. This “negro” cat was fertile with common cats. On
the opposite coast of Africa, at Mombas, Captain Owen, R.N.,[95]
states that all the cats are covered with short stiff hair instead
of fur: he gives a curious account of a cat from Algoa Bay, which
had been kept for some time on board and could be identified with
certainty; this animal was left for only eight weeks at Mombas, but
during that short period it “underwent a complete metamorphosis,
having parted with its sandy-coloured fur.” A cat from the Cape of
Good Hope has been described by Desmarest as remarkable from a red
stripe extending along the whole length of its back. Throughout an
immense area, namely, the Malayan archipelago, Siam, Pegu, and
Burmah, all the cats have truncated tails about half the proper
length,[96] often with a sort of knot at the end. In the Caroline
archipelago the cats have very long legs, and are of a
reddish-yellow colour.[97] In China a breed has drooping ears. At
Tobolsk, according to Gmelin, there is a red-coloured breed. In
Asia, also, we find the well-known Angora or Persian breed.

The domestic cat has run wild in several countries, and everywhere
assumes, as far as can be judged by the short recorded
descriptions, a uniform character. Near Maldonado, in La Plata, I
shot one which seemed perfectly wild; it was carefully examined by
Mr. Waterhouse,[98] who found nothing remarkable in it, excepting
its great size. In New Zealand according to Dieffenbach, the feral
cats assume a streaky grey colour like that of wild cats; and this
is the case with the half-wild cats of the Scotch Highlands.

We have seen that distant countries possess distinct domestic races of the cat. The differences may be in part due to descent from several aboriginal species, or at least to crosses with them. In some cases, as in Paraguay, Mombas, and Antigua, the differences seem due to the direct action of different conditions of life. In other cases some slight effect may possibly be attributed to natural selection, as cats in many cases have largely to support themselves and to escape diverse dangers. But man, owing to the difficulty of pairing cats, has done nothing by methodical selection; and probably very little by unintentional selection; though in each litter he generally saves the prettiest, and values most a good breed of mouse- or rat-catchers. Those cats which have a strong tendency to prowl after game, generally get destroyed by traps. As cats are so much petted, a breed bearing the same relation to other cats, that lapdogs bear to larger dogs, would have been much valued; and if selection could have been applied, we should certainly have had many breeds in each long-civilised country, for there is plenty of variability to work upon.

We see in this country considerable diversity in size, some in the
proportions of the body, and extreme variability in colouring. I
have only lately attended to this subject, but have already heard
of some singular cases of variation; one of a cat born in the West
Indies toothless, and remaining so all its life. Mr. Tegetmeier has
shown me the skull of a female cat with its canines so much
developed that they protruded uncovered beyond the lips; the tooth
with the fang being .95, and the part projecting from the gum .6 of
an inch in length. I have heard of several families of six-toed
cats, in one of which the peculiarity had been transmitted for at
least three generations. The tail varies greatly in length; I have
seen a cat which always carried its tail flat on its back when
pleased. The ears vary in shape, and certain strains, in England,
inherit a pencil-like tuft of hairs, above a quarter of an inch in
length, on the tips of their ears; and this same peculiarity,
according to Mr. Blyth, characterises some cats in India. The great
variability in the length of the tail and the lynx-like tufts of
hairs on the ears are apparently analogous to differences in
certain wild species of the genus. A much more important
difference, according to Daubenton,[99] is that the intestines of
domestic cats are wider, and a third longer, than in wild cats of
the same size; and this apparently has been by their less strictly
carnivorous diet.

REFERENCES

[1] Owen ‘British Fossil Mammals,’ pp. 123 to 133. Pictet’s ‘Traité de Pal.,’ 1853, tom. i. p. 202. De Blainville in his ‘Ostéographie, Canidæ,’ p. 142, has largely discussed the whole subject, and concludes that the extinct parent of all domesticated dogs came nearest to the wolf in organisation, and to the jackal in habits. _See also_ Boyd Dawkins, ‘Cave Hunting,’ 1874, p. 131, etc., and his other publications. Jeitteles has discussed in great detail the character of the breeds of pre-historic dogs: ‘Die vorgeschichtlichen Alterthümer der Stadt Olmütz,’ II. Theil, 1872, p. 44 to end.

[2] Pallas, I believe, originated this doctrine in ‘Act. Acad. St. Petersburgh,’ 1780, Part ii. Ehrenberg has advocated it, as may be seen in De Blainville’s ‘Ostéographie,’ p. 79. It has been carried to an extreme extent by Col. Hamilton Smith in the ‘Naturalist Library,’ vols ix and x. Mr. W. C. Martin adopts it in his excellent ‘History of the Dog,’ 1845; as does Dr. Morton, as well as Nott and Gliddon, in the United States. Prof. Low, in his ‘Domesticated Animals,’ 1845, p. 666, comes to this same conclusion. No one has argued on this side with more clearness and force than the late James Wilson, of Edinburgh, in various papers read before the Highland Agricultural and Wernerian Societies. Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ 1860, tom. iii. p. 107), though he believes that most dogs have descended from the jackal, yet inclines to the belief that some are descended from the wolf. Prof. Gervais (‘Hist. Nat. Mamm.’ 1855, tom. ii. p. 69, referring to the view that all the domestic races are the modified descendants of a single species, after a long discussion, says, “Cette opinion est, suivant nous du moins, la moins probable.”

[3] Berjeau, ‘The Varieties of the Dog; in old Sculptures and Pictures,’ 1863. ‘Der Hund,’ von Dr. F. L. Walther, Giessen, 1817, s. 48: this author seems carefully to have studied all classical works on the subject. _See also_ Volz, ‘Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte,’ Leipzig, 1852, s. 115, ‘Youatt on the Dog,’ 1845, p. 6. A very full history is given by De Blainville in his ‘Ostéographie, Canidæ.’

[4] I have seen drawings of this dog from the tomb of the son of Esar Haddon, and clay models in the British Museum. Nott and Gliddon, in their ‘Types of Mankind,’ 1854, p. 393, give a copy of these drawings. This dog has been called a Thibetan mastiff, but Mr. H. A. Oldfield, who is familiar with the so-called Thibet mastiff, and has examined the drawings in the British Museum, informs me that he considers them different.

[5] ‘Proc. Zoolog. Soc.,’ July 12th, 1831.

[6] ‘Sporting in Algeria,’ p. 51.

[7] Berjeau gives facsimiles of the Egyptian drawings. Mr. C. L. Martin in his ‘History of the Dog,’ 1845, copies several figures from the Egyptian monuments, and speaks with much confidence with respect to their identity with still living dogs. Messrs. Nott and Gliddon (‘Types of Mankind,’ 1854, p. 388) give still more numerous figures. Mr. Gliddon asserts that a curl-tailed greyhound, like that represented on the most ancient monuments, is common in Borneo; but the Rajah, Sir J. Brooke, informs me that no such dog exists there.

[8] These, and the following facts on the Danish remains, are taken from M. Morlot’s most interesting memoir in ‘Soc. Vaudoise des Sc. Nat.’ tom. vi., 1860, pp. 281, 299, 320.

[9] ‘Die Fauna der Pfahlbauten,’ 1861, s. 117, 162.

[10] De Blainville ‘Ostéographie, Canidæ.’

[11] Sir R. Schomburgk has given me information on this head. _See also_ ‘Journal of R. Geographical Soc.’ vol. xiii. 1843, p. 65.

[12] ‘Domestication of Animals:’ Ethnological Soc., Dec. 22nd, 1863.

[13] ‘Journal of Researches,’ etc., 1845, p. 393. With respect to _Canis antarcticus, see_ p. 193. For the case of the antelope, _see_ ‘Journal Royal Geograph. Soc.,’ vol. xxiii. p. 94.

[14] The authorities for the foregoing statements are as follow:—Richardson in ‘Fauna Boreali-Americana,’ 1829, pp. 64, 75; Dr. Kane ‘Arctic Explorations,’ 1856, vol. i. pp. 398, 455; Dr. Hayes ‘Arctic Boat Journey,’ 1860, p. 167. Franklin’s ‘Narrative,’ vol. i. p. 269, gives the case of three whelps of a black wolf being carried away by the Indians. Parry, Richardson, and others, give accounts of wolves and dogs naturally crossing in the eastern parts of North America. Seeman in his ‘Voyage of H.M.S. _Herald_,’ 1853, vol. ii. p. 26, says the wolf is often caught by the Esquimaux for the purpose of crossing with their dogs, and thus adding to their size and strength. M. Lamare-Picquot in ‘Bull. de la Soc. d’Acclimat,’ tom. vii., 1860, p. 148, gives a good account of the half-bred Esquimaux dogs.

[15] ‘Fauna Boreali-Americana,’ 1829, pp. 73, 78, 80. Nott and Gliddon, ‘Types of Mankind,’ p. 383. The naturalist and traveller Bartram is quoted by Hamilton Smith, in ‘Naturalist Lib.,’ vol. x. p. 156. A Mexican domestic dog seems also to resemble a wild dog of the same country; but this may be the prairie-wolf. Another capable judge, Mr. J. K. Lord (‘The Naturalist in Vancouver Island,’ 1866, vol. ii. p. 218), says that the Indian dog of the Spokans, near the Rocky Mountains, “is beyond all question nothing more than a tamed Cayote or prairie-wolf,” or _Canis latrans._)

[16] I quote this from Mr. R. Hill’s excellent account of the Alco or domestic dog of Mexico, in Gosse’s ‘Naturalist’s Sojourn in Jamaica,’ 1851, p. 329.

[17] ‘Naturgeschichte der Säugethiere von Paraguay,’ 1830, s. 151.

[18] Quoted in Humboldt’s ‘Aspects of Nature’ (Eng. trans.), vol. i. p. 108.

[19] p.t’s ‘Travels in Hungary and Transylvania,’ vol. i. p. 501. Jeitteles ‘Fauna Hungariæ Superioris,’ 1862, s. 13. _See_ Pliny ‘Hist. of the World’ (Eng. trans.), 8th book, ch. xl., about the Gauls crossing their dogs. _See also_ Aristotle ‘Hist. Animal.’lib. viii. c. 28. For good evidence about wolves and dogs naturally crossing near the Pyrenees, _see_ M. Mauduyt ‘Du Loup et de ses Races,’ Poitiers, 1851; also Pallas in ‘Acta Acad. St. Petersburgh,’ 1780, part ii. p. 94.

[20] I give this on excellent authority, namely Mr. Blyth (under the signature of Zoophilus), in the ‘Indian Sporting Review,’ Oct. 1856, p. 134. Mr. Blyth states that he was struck with the resemblance between a brush-tailed race of pariah-dogs, north-west of Cawnpore, and the Indian wolf. He gives corroborative evidence with respect to the dogs of the valley of the Nerbudda.

[21] For numerous and interesting details on the resemblance of dogs and jackals _see_ Isid. Geoffroy St.-Hilaire ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ 1860, tom. iii. p. 101. _ See also_ ‘Hist. Nat. des Mammifères,’ par Prof. Gervais, 1855, tom. ii. p. 60.

[22] Also Güldenstädt ‘Nov. Comment. Acad. Petrop.,’ tom. xx., pro anno 1775, p. 449. Also Salvin in ‘Land and Water,’ Oct. 1869.

[23] Quoted by De Blainville in his ‘Ostéographie, Canidæ,’ pp. 79, 98.

[24] _See_ Pallas in ‘Act. Acad. St. Petersburgh,’ 1780, part ii. p. 91. For Algeria, _see_ Isid. Geoffroy St.-Hilaire ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 177. In both countries it is the male jackal which pairs with female domestic dogs.

[25] John Barbut’s ‘Description of the Coast of Guinea in 1746.’

[26] ‘Travels in South Africa,’ vol. ii. p. 272.

[27] Selwyn, Geology of Victoria; ‘Journal of Geolog. Soc.,’ vol. xiv., 1858, p. 536, and vol. xvi., 1860, p. 148; and Prof. M’Coy, in ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.’ (3rd series) vol. ix., 1862, p. 147. The Dingo differs from the dogs of the central Polynesian islands. Dieffenbach remarks (‘Travels,’ vol. ii. p. 45) that the native New Zealand dog also differs from the Dingo.

[28] These latter remarks afford, I think, a sufficient answer to some criticisms by Mr. Wallace, on the multiple origin of dogs, given in Lyell’s ‘Principles of Geology,’ 1872, vol. ii. p. 295.

[29] ‘Proceedings Zoolog. Soc.,’ 1833, p. 112. _ See also,_ on the taming of the common wolf, L. Lloyd, ‘Scandinavian Adventures,’ 1854, vol. i. p. 460. With respect to the jackal, _see_ Prof. Gervais ‘Hist. Nat. Mamm.’ tom. ii. p. 61. With respect to the aguara of Paraguay _see_ Rengger’s work.

[30] Roulin, in ‘Mém. présent. par divers Savans,’ tom. vi. p. 341.

[31] Martin, ‘History of the Dog,’ p. 14.

[32] Quoted by L. Lloyd in ‘Field Sports of North of Europe,’ vol. i. p. 387.

[33] Quatrefages, ‘Soc. d’Acclimat.,’ May 11th, 1863, p. 7.

[34] ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.’ vol. xv., 1845, p. 140.

[35] Azara, ‘Voyages dans l’Amér. Mérid.’ tom. i. p. 381; his account is fully confirmed by Rengger. Quatrefages gives an account of a bitch brought from Jerusalem to France which burrowed a hole and littered in it. _ See_ ‘Discours, Exposition des Races Canines,’ 1865, p. 3.

[36] With respect to wolves burrowing holes _ see_ Richardson, ‘Fauna Boreali-Americana,’ p. 64; and Bechstein ‘Naturgeschichte Deutschlands,’ B. i. s. 617.

[37] _See_ Poeppig, ‘Reise in Chile,’ B. i. s. 290; Mr. G. Clarke, as above; and Rengger, s. 155.

[38] Dogs, ‘Nat. Library,’ vol. x. p. 121; an endemic South American dog seems also to have become feral in this island. _See_ Gosse’s ‘Jamaica,’ p. 340.

[39] Low ‘Domesticated Animals,’ p. 650.

[40] ‘The Naturalist Library,’ Dogs, vol. x. pp. 4, 19.

[41] Quoted by Prof. Gervais, ‘Hist. Nat. Mamm.,’ tom. ii. p. 66.

[42] J. Hunter shows that the long period of seventy-three days given by Buffon is easily explained by the bitch having received the dog many times during a period of sixteen days (‘Phil. Transact.,’ 1787, p. 353). Hunter found that the gestation of a mongrel from wolf and dog (‘Phil. Transact.,’ 1789, p. 160) apparently was sixty-three days, for she received the dog more than once. The period of a mongrel dog and jackal was fifty-nine days. Fred. Cuvier found the period of gestation of the wolf to be (‘Dict. Class. d’Hist. Nat.’ tom. iv. p. 8) two months and a few days, which agrees with the dog. Isid G. St.-Hilaire, who has discussed the whole subject, and from whom I quote Bellingeri, states (‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 112) that in the Jardin des Plantes the period of the jackal has been found to be from sixty to sixty-three days, exactly as with the dog.

[43] _See_ Isid. Geoffroy St.-Hilaire ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 112, on the odour of jackals. Col. Ham. Smith in ‘Nat. Lib.,’ vol. x. p. 289.

[44] Quoted by Quatrefages in ‘Bull. Soc. d’Acclimat.,’ May 11th, 1863.

[45] ‘Journal de la Physiologie,’ tom. ii. p. 385.

[46] _See_ Mr. R. Hill’s excellent account of this breed in Gosse’s ‘Jamaica,’ p. 338; Rengger ‘Säugethiere von Paraguay,’ s. 153. With respect to Spitz dogs, _see_ Bechstein’s ‘Naturgesch. Deutschlands,’ 1801, B. i. s. 638. With respect to Dr. Hodgkin’s statement made before Brit. Assoc. _see_ ‘The Zoologist,’ vol. iv. for 1845-46 p. 1097.

[47] ‘Acta Acad. St. Petersburgh,’ 1780, part ii. pp. 84, 100.

[48] M. Broca has shown (‘Journal de Physiologie,’ tom. ii. p. 353) that Buffon’s experiments have been often misrepresented. Broca has collected (pp. 390-395) many facts on the fertility of crossed dogs, wolves, and jackals.

[49] ‘De la Longévité Humaine,’ par M. Flourens, 1855, p. 143. Mr. Blyth says (‘Indian Sporting Review,’ vol. 2 p. 137) that he has seen in India several hybrids from the pariah-dog and jackal; and between one of these hybrids and a terrier. The experiments of Hunter on the jackal are well-known. _See also_ Isid. Geoffroy St.-Hilaire, ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 217, who speaks of the hybrid offspring of the jackal as perfectly fertile for three generations.

[50] On authority of F. Cuvier quoted in Bronn’s ‘Geschichte der Natur,’ B ii. s. 164.

[51] W. C. L. Martin ‘History of the Dog,’ 1845, p. 203. Mr. Philip P. King, after ample opportunities of observation, informs me that the Dingo and European dogs often cross in Australia.

[52] Rüppel ‘Neue Wirbelthiere von Abyssinien,’ 1835-40 ‘Mammif.,’ s. 39 pl. xiv. There is a specimen of this fine animal in the British Museum.

[53] Even Pallas admits this; _see_ ‘Act. Acad. St. Petersburgh,’ 1780, p. 93.

[54] Quoted by I. Geoffroy, ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 453.

[55] F. Cuvier in ‘Annales du Muséum,’ tom. xviii. p. 337; Godron ‘De l’Espèce,’ tom. i. p. 342; and Col. H. Smith in ‘Nat. Library,’ vol. ix. p. 101. _See also_ some observations on the degeneracy of the skull in certain breeds, by Prof. Bianconi, ‘La Theorie Darwinienne,’ 1874, p. 279.

[56] Dr. Burt Wilder, ‘American Assoc. Advancement of Science,’ 1873, pp. 236, 239.

[57] Isid. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire ‘Hist. des Anomalies,’ 1832, tom. i. p. 660, Gervais ‘Hist. Nat. des Mammifères,’ tom. ii., 1855, p. 66. De Blainville (‘Ostéographie, Canidæ,’ p. 137) has also seen an extra molar on both sides.

[58] ‘Ostéographie, Canidæ,’ p. 137.

[59] Würzburger ‘Medecin. Zeitschrift,’ 1860, B. i. s. 265.

[60] Mr. Yarrell in ‘Proc. Zoolog. Soc.,’ Oct. 8th, 1833. Mr. Waterhouse showed me a skull of one of these dogs, which had only a single molar on each side and some imperfect incisors.

[61] Quoted in ‘The Veterinary,’ London, vol. viii. p. 415.

[62] This is quoted from Stonehenge, a great authority, ‘The Dog,’ 1867, p. 187.

[63] ‘Hist. Nat. Général,’ tom. iii. p. 448.

[64] W. Scrope ‘Art of Deer-Stalking,’ p. 354.

[65] Quoted by Col. Ham. Smith in ‘Nat. Lib.,’ vol. x. p. 79.

[66] De Blainville ‘Ostéographie, Canidæ,’ p. 134. F. Cuvier ‘Annales du Muséum,’ tom. xviii. p. 342. In regard to mastiffs, _see_ Col. H. Smith ‘Nat. Lib.’ vol. x. p. 218. For the Thibet mastiff, _see_ Mr. Hodgson in ‘Journal of As. Soc. of Bengal,’ vol. i., 1832, p. 342.

[67] ‘The Dog,’ 1845, p. 186. With respect to diseases Youatt asserts (p. 167) that the Italian greyhound is “strongly subject” to polypi in the matrix or vagina. The spaniel and pug (p. 182) are most liable to bronchocele. The liability to distemper (p. 232) is extremely different in different breeds. On the distemper, _see also_ Col. Hutchinson on ‘Dog Breaking,’ 1850, p. 279.

[68] _See_ Youatt on the Dog, p. 15; ‘The Veterinary,’ London, vol. xi. p. 235.

[69] ‘Journal of As. Soc. of Bengal,’ vol. iii. p. 19.

[70] ‘Travels,’ vol. ii. p. 15.

[71] Hodgson in ‘Journal of As. Soc. of Bengal,’ vol. i. p. 342.

[72] ‘Field Sports of the North of Europe,’ vol. ii. p. 165.

[73] ‘Hist. Nat. des Mammif.,’ 1855, tom. ii. pp. 66, 67.

[74] ‘History of Quadrupeds,’ 1793, vol. i. p. 238.

[75] ‘Oriental Field Sports,’ quoted by Youatt, ‘The Dog,’ p. 15.

[76] A. Murray gives this passage in his ‘Geographical Distribution of Mammals,’ 4to, 1866, p. 8.

[77] Quoted by Mr. Galton, ‘Domestication of Animals,’ p. 13.

[78] ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 450.

[79] Mr. Greenhow on the Canadian Dog in Loudon’s ‘Mag. of Nat. Hist.,’ vol. vi., 1833, p. 511.

[80] _See_ Mr. C. O. Groom-Napier on the webbing of the hind feet of Otterhounds in ‘Land and Water,’ Oct. 13, 1866, p. 270.

[81] ‘Fauna Boreali-Americana,’ 1829, p. 62.

[82] ‘The Horse in all his Varieties,’ etc., 1829, pp. 230, 234.

[83] ‘The Dog,’ 1845, pp. 31, 35; with respect to King Charles’s spaniel, p. 45; for the setter, p. 90.

[84] In the ‘Encyclop. of Rural Sports,’ p. 557.

[85] Author of ‘Researches into the History of the British Dog.’

[86] _See_ Col. Hamilton Smith on the antiquity of the Pointer, in ‘Nat. Lib.’ vol. x. p. 196.

[87] The Newfoundland dog is believed to have originated from a cross between the Esquimaux dog and a large French hound. _See_ Dr. Hodgkin ‘British Assoc.,’ 1844; Bechstein ‘Naturgesch. Deutschland,’ B. i. s. 574; ‘Nat. Lib.,’ vol. x. p. 132; also Mr. Jukes’ ‘Excursion in and about Newfoundland.’

[88] De Blainville ‘Ostéographie, Felis,’ p. 65, on the character of _F. caligulata_; pp. 85, 89, 90, 175, on the other mummied species. He quotes Ehrenberg on _F. maniculata_ being mummied.

[89] Asiatic Soc. of Calcutta; Curator’s Report, Aug. 1856. The passage from Sir W. Jardine is quoted from this Report. Mr. Blyth, who has especially attended to the wild and domestic cats of India, has given in this Report a very interesting discussion on their origin.

[90] ‘Fauna Hungariæ Sup.,’ 1862, s. 12.

[91] Isid. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 177.

[92] ‘Proc. Zoolog. Soc.,’ 1863, p. 184.

[93] ‘Säugethiere von Paraguay,’ 1830, s. 212.

[94] ‘Mem. présentés par divers Savans: Acad. Roy. des Sciences,’ tom. vi. p. 346. Gomara first noticed this fact in 1554.

[95] ‘Narrative of Voyages,’ vol. ii. p. 180.

[96] J. Crawfurd ‘Descript. Dict. of the Indian Islands,’ p. 255. The Madagascar cat is said to have a twisted tail; _see_ Desmarest in ‘Encyclop. Nat. Mamm.,’ 1820, p. 233, for some of the other breeds.

[97] Admiral Lutké’s Voyage, vol. iii. p. 308.

[98] ‘Zoology of the Voyage of the Beagle, Mammalia,’ p. 20. Dieffenbach ‘Travels in New Zealand,’ vol. ii. p. 185. Ch. St. John ‘Wild Sports of the Highlands,’ 1846, p. 40.

[99] Quoted by Isid. Geoffroy ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 427.