interesting and elegant little animal seems, in some measure, to form a connecting link between the squirrel and dormouse tribes, having the outward form of the former, with the habits of the latter. It is very common in the neighbourhood of Quebec, but is rather difficult to meet with, on account of its retired habits; its colour above is brownish red, on the under side white; along the ridge of the back, and on each side, runs a black streak, the spaces between each being of a pale yellow colour; its tail is rather longer than the body, and covered with a spreading fur, but less abundantly than in other squirrels. It is plentiful in the crevices of the rocks forming the bank of the St. Lawrence, from the Chedier River to St. Nicholas. It also breeds commonly in the cellars and crevices under some of the Canadian wood houses. A young one of this year, which was captured in a room, soon became very tame, and played about, regardless of the persons to whom it was accustomed; but was always timid before strangers, skulking into a corner of its cage, and burying itself in some dry grass placed there for its bed. It had a very shrill whistling cry, which it repeated at intervals, as it jumped against the wires in front of its cage. It was extremely nimble, and could get through very small crevices, frequently escaping by pressing asunder the wires of its cage, and on these occasions was very difficult to recapture; but if allowed to run about the room for some time, would attempt to enter its cage again of its own accord. It was fed principally upon shelled almonds and raisins, but was fond of apples, and other pulpy fruits; it also ate grain: and this forms a large portion of its nutriment in the wild state. I regret to say that one day, during the temporary absence of my friend, the squirrel escaped, and, in endeavouring to retake it, the people of the house frightened it out into the fields; and although it several times returned as far as the threshold of the door, yet the ill-judged attempts at re-capturing it at last completely scared it from the spot. E. H. Greenhow. Dec. 10. 1832.

The Rat's Perception of Medicine. My garden is near the river, and some time ago rats swarmed in it. I employed a rat-catcher to destroy them by poison. Numbers of them, after taking it, were creeping about, into and out of their holes. I had put my plants of the genus Aloe out of doors for the summer, as I had done for twenty successive summers before. The rats fell about them, and ate some of them quite up; and, amongst them, a large mitre-leaved aloe, which weighed from fourteen to twenty pounds. Is it not surprising that the rats should know that the aloes,

exotic plants, are of a purging quality? and I think it is quite clear that they ate them for their purgative effect, as I had never before had a plant of Aloe touched by the rats, nor have I had since. Thomas Hitchen. Norwich. Oct. 20.

1832.

PLANTS. The Common Berberry (Bérberis vulgaris L.) perfectly harmless to Wheat. Sir, It must be satisfactory to every botanist to have the characters of his favourites cleared from all accusations; I therefore make no apology for requesting a place for the following: - It is a commonly received opinion that the Bérberis vulgàris (common berberry) has the effect of completely preventing the fertility of corn growing near to it, even to the distance of some hundreds of yards from it. As illustrative of the inaccuracy of this idea, a friend of mine, residing at Bath, mentioned to me, that, during the last autumn, when walking round some corn land belonging to one of his relatives who lives in Wiltshire, his attention was particularly called to the very heavy crop in one of the fields; in the hedge adjoining which, he, at the same time, observed Bérberis vulgàris in plenty. His relative was fully impressed with the idea of the destructiveness of Bérberis, and, not being a botanist, did not know that it grew there. I may add that the wheat from that field, on being threshed, completely answered the expectations raised by its fine appearance. Charles C. Babington.

Typha latifolia, or Broad-leaved Reed Mace. I am not aware whether the following applications of the reed mace (too commonly called bulrush) are generally known, and I communicate them, because I consider that such facts should be recorded. A weaver of velvet told me, that in Spitalfields, and other places, the head of this rush is used for cleaning their work, in preference to a common brush. Since then, on being in the neighbourhood of Blackheath, I met a man carrying a large bundle of them, and, upon enquiry, he told me that they would be sold to the poor at one penny each, for the purpose of a hat brush. I see no reason to doubt their utility in either case, for their softness and elasticity render them very applicable to these purposes. — James Fennell. Nov. 1832.

Four several Habitats for Four rare Species of British Plants. Carex speirostachya. On the 5th of July, 1832, I found this plant in plenty, at the foot of Clogwyn ddû'r Arddû, Snowdon, between the lake and the bottom of the perpendicular part of the rock. This is the black precipice which appears in front of a person, during the greater part of the ascent from Dolbadarn Castle. This plant had not been

observed in England, and only by Mr. Don in Scotland, previously to my discovery of it in the above spot, Aug. 30. 1830. It does not appear to occur in other parts of the mountain.

Luzula [Luciola Smith] spicata. In some very wet bogs, near Llyn y Cwm, on Glyder Fawr, Caernarvonshire, July 10. 1832. This locality is mentioned for it, in the Botanist's Guide with a mark of doubt; it does not appear to have been noticed by any other author.

Festuca ovina. On the top of Cader Idris I found, on July 25. 1832, a variety of this plant, with the corollas very hairy. It is probably F. hirsuta of Host, mentioned in Hooker, Br. Flora, p. 46.

Scheuchzeria palustris. I found this plant in seed, at Bomere Pool, near Shrewsbury, on Aug. 4. 1832. This is, I believe, the second recorded British locality for this very rare plant; the other being in Yorkshire. - Charles C. Babington.

GEOLOGY. The Red Sandstone along the Meuse is merely the Rubbish cast up from below the Limestone.-Sir, In Phillips and Conybeare's Geology of England and Wales, there is a note on the red sandstone along the Meuse, near Huy, and some observations as to its position, as affecting its claim to the name of old red sandstone. I have been frequently at the alum mines along that range of hills; and I can certify that all the red ground seen above the limestone, to the left of Huy, descending the Meuse, is accidental. It is merely the rubbish cast up from below the limestone: the red sandstone itself is partly a conglomerate and partly fissile, and highly micaceous, and belongs to the greywacke, not to the new red sandstone. W. B. Clarke. Parkstone, near Poole, Sept. 8. 1832.

METEOROLOGY. One of the most terrific and awful Hail Storms that perhaps ever occurred in this part of the country happened about three weeks ago. Hot-houses, and hot-bed sashes of every description, had the glass nearly all broken, as some of the hailstones measured 5 in. round. Several trees, with trunks measuring 12 in. and 15 in. in diameter, were completely cut over by the lightning (some just above the surface, and others about 6 ft. from the soil), and carried a considerable distance. Hedges and other fences were, in various places, levelled with the ground. The streets in Lancaster appeared like rivers; and, on my return from town to my garden, I found it like one large lake, wholly covered with The gardens on sloping grounds were completely destroyed; the soil, crop, gooseberry bushes, and hedges being all washed away.-M. Saul. Lancaster, May 4. 1833.

water.

369

MISCELLANEOUS INTELLIGENCE.

ART. I. Retrospective Criticism.

MR. AUDUBON, Jun., in Reply to Mr. Waterton's Remarks (p. 215.) on Audubon's Biography of Birds.-Sir, Mr. Charles Waterton having asserted (p. 215.) that Mr. Audubon was not the author of the Ornithological Biography, and that "he possesses undeniable proof that, when Mr. Audubon was in England, he did actually apply to a gentleman to write his history of the birds for him," I do not feel willing to permit such an assertion to pass uncontradicted during my father's absence from England.

I have the authority of the gentleman Mr. Waterton refers to, in stating that "Mr. Audubon's proposal to him was to obtain his assistance in the scientific details, and in no other part of the work whatsoever;" and further, I have the authority of this gentleman, for stating his "firm conviction, arising from personal intercourse and the perusal of the original manuscripts, that Mr. Audubon, and no other person, is the bona fide author of the Ornithological Biography.

I shall not notice Mr. Waterton further, except to express my thanks for his generous conduct, in withholding his attacks on Mr. Audubon for two years after the book in question was published, and during the time the author was in England, and bringing these charges forward when my father has returned to the forests of America, and is unable to answer for himself.

Should my father hereafter think it worth his while to notice Mr. Waterton, he will be quite able, on his return to England, to prove the correctness of all that he has said on the natural history of America. I am, Sir, yours, &c. V. G. Audubon. 121. Great Portland Street, June 7. 1833.

Observations on Mr. Waterton's Attacks on Mr. Audubon. (p. 215.)-Sir, The biography of men who have devoted their lives to the acquisition of knowledge, led on by a lofty enthusiasm in pursuit of a favourite science, regardless of danger, and foregoing the pleasures and comforts of civilised life, I say, the biography of such men is particularly instructive; but it frequently presents us with facts not very creditable to human nature. Numerous are the instances of

the unjust treatment which they have received from their contemporaries. While occupied in distant countries with their favourite pursuits, they have sometimes found on their return that envy and jealousy have been busily employed in detracting from their merits, and endeavouring to blight their fair fame, and deprive them of the just reward of their labours. Such is now the fate of a man whom posterity will regard as the most distinguished ornithologist of the present age; I mean, Mr. Audubon. For the last two years Mr. Audubon has been again exploring the forests and prairies of Western America, encountering all the hardships and dangers of savage life, to acquire a more complete knowledge of the characters and habits of the feathered inhabitants of these regions. There are few of your readers to whom the graphic excellence of Mr. Audubon's pencil is entirely unknown. His felicity in seizing the characteristic attitudes of birds, and transfusing into his figures the spirit of life, has never before been attained by any naturalist. Mr. Audubon, it is well known, is engaged in a large, and necessarily expensive, work on ornithology; but he has experienced the common fate of too many devotees to science; a part of his reward is snatched from him by others, who pillage from his works, and publish them under another form. Of this, however, he has less reason to complain, than of the envious attacks on his fair fame and credit as a naturalist. I was greatly surprised and grieved to see two attacks of this kind, in your Magazines for March and May last, from a correspondent whose Wanderings are always amusing. On these attacks I shall request room to offer some remarks, as Mr. Audubon is not in the country to defend himself, which he is fully able to do if he could spare time from his favourite pursuits to attend to subjects of a personal nature. Mr. Charles Waterton's remarks on Mr. Audubon's account of the habits of the turkey buzzard (Vúltur Aúra) (p. 163.) occupy seven pages, evidently written to throw ridicule on Mr. Audubon's statements respecting the powers of sight and smell of that animal, though they contain no facts or arguments whatever to invalidate the descriptions of Mr. Audubon, but are filled with a series of quizzing interrogatories that are undeserving a serious refutation. I appeal to the good sense of your readers to confirm this judgment. I shall only stop to remark, how would Mr. Waterton's Wanderings appear, if subjected to the test of ridicule, or even to the severe ordeal of sober criticism? Surely the author of the Wanderings in South America should have some charity for a brother traveller, if required; but I deny that Mr. Audubon requires