been a strenuous defender of the hedgehog from the charge of destroying game, which has been brought against it. The facts mentioned in 'The Zoologist' (Zool. 715), in the interesting paper "A last word for the poor Hedgehog," together with the assertions of several gamekeepers, with whom I have conversed on the subject, induced me to alter my opinion, as to its entire harmlessness ; but the following fact, which came under my own observation last week, so fully convicts the animal in ques- tion of the charge of carnivorous habits, as to remove me from the list of his de- fenders. While walking one evening, I overtook a large hedgehog, which appeared just to have set out on its nocturnal rambles. I carried him home, and gave him the run of a small walled garden. In the middle of the second night of his captivity, I was awakened by the loud and alarmed cackling of a couple of fowls, the fattening tenants of a coop in the same garden. On looking out of my bed-room window, ex- pecting to see some biped midnight plunderer, I could discover nothing but the dim outline of the coop. Upon listening, however, I heard the cries of the chickens repeated, but now with the addition of a perfectly different sound, for literally "thrice and once the hedgehog whined," and I was no longer at a loss to guess the cause of the alarm of the fowls. I immediately lighted a candle, dressed, and went out to inquire more particularly into the affair, expecting to find the urchin at the bars, scaring the imprisoned fowls. I found, however, that he had crept through a space not quite three inchesln width, into the coop, and that he was engaged in close com- bat with one of the fowls, whose life's blood he would have drank, had not my timely arrival prevented the tragedy ! From that moment the last remaining spark of my love and respect to his race as an inoffensive and much maligned one, was quenched. Until then I cherished the hope expressed by your correspondent, W. H. S., and by Mr. Waterton, in his very interesting Essays, that the carnivorous habits of the hedge- hog were the effects of confinement, and a lack of their natural food, and did not arise from any innate propensity in them to prey upon these animals. But the case I have mentioned, destroys, I think, even this charitable hope. Here was the very experi- ment which W. H. S. suggested as one which ought to be adopted, in order "to try the matter quite fairly." A hedgehog is placed in a walled garden, which is known to contain beetles and other insects, he is also supplied with milk, yet on the very next night, instead of quietly feeding on his supposed natural food, he is discovered in the act of killing a full grown fowl, having insinuated himself through the narrow bars of its coop for that purpose ! This is a case so strong, and having seen it myself, I can vouch for the accuracy of it, that unless carnivorous propensities are natural to the hedgehog, it is impossible to ascribe it to any other cause than Mr. Waterton's suggestion, that they are at the time "not quite right in their head." If it was so with my hedgehog, I can truly say there was method in his madness!
Having thus I fear too truly proved, that the poor hedgehog must no longer be considered an inoffensive animal, I think he still deserves the protection of the naturalist ; for although "a necessary act incurs no blame," and the destruction of them in game preserves, is thus rendered necessary,' yet wanton cruelty to this or any other of God's creatures, is a crime, which though still too prevalent among the lower classes, is I trust being materially lessened, by the influence of the increasing number of naturalists of the present day. The necessity of destroying animals of different kinds injurious to man cannot be denied by the most humane. As Cowper says,—
Or safety interfere, his rights and claims
