On the whole, then, not having seen the act of swallowing the young, and having tried to survey in a spirit of impartiality the objections brought against the belief, what is the conclusion? Speaking for myself, I decline to come to a definite opinion. I have been told that such an attitude is simply begging the question. On the contrary, I maintain that it is the only scientific attitude one can take up on this or any other question, if the evidence seems to be inconclusive. Why should any one be expected to hold definite opinions on matters he considers unproved, even if they be possibly or probably true? I do not feel bound to form or express a definite opinion on the stability or otherwise of the Peruvian Government simply because I have two friends, one of whom thinks it the strongest that has existed for years, and the other is convinced that it is tottering to its foundations. I simply await events, in order to see which opinion turns out the correct one, keeping an open mind on the subject, and not refusing to weigh evidence whichever way it leads. Similarly in the adder-swallowing question, I do not refuse to believe. it because I have not been fortunate enough to see it for myself (the combined evidence of the community has to be sufficient on many questions not coming under our individual notice), nor do I feel bound to accept every statement made by all sorts of people (or one would have many extraordinary beliefs). But it may be fairly asked, What would be considered

satisfactory proof?

My answer is this. Let the first

person who sees the adder-mother swallow her young proceed to carry out the following programme :—

1. Secure the mother alive or dead, and tie a ligature securely round the neck.

2. Take the specimen to any well-known naturalist, and make a statement in the presence of witnesses as to the circumstances attending the capture.

3. Request the naturalist to dissect the adder in the presence of three reputable witnesses.

The final act in the drama will be the finding (or not finding) of the young in the gullet of the addermother, or elsewhere, by the naturalist in question.

This is what science calls proving a question, and short of this, whatever private opinion may be held on the matter, scientists cannot be expected to consider the adder-swallowing belief proved. Until this is done, rather will they regard the question as one. capable of proof, if true, but hitherto unsettled.

CHAPTER XIII.

THE ADDER-Continued.

STATEMENTS BY CORRESPONDENTS ON THE SWALLOWING OF THE YOUNG BY THE MOTHER.

HAVING now discussed the theoretical side of the adder-swallowing question, and come to the conclusion that anatomically and physiologically there is nothing impossible in the belief, it is of interest to see what practical men have to say on the matter. I have a large mass of correspondence in my possession on the point, all of which is most interesting, and from which all the following extracts are made. No comment is made on the letters as they are quoted, as it is difficult to do so without appearing, however unintentionally, to doubt the good faith of some of the writers, in some cases at all events. They should be judged in the light of what has been already learnt about the habits and structure of the adder, and especially in connection with the arguments considered in the last chapter.

In a paragraph in F. G. Aflalo's column "About Animals" in the Morning Leader' of 25th July 1900, he refers to a letter received from Mr Jacob of Eythorne, Dover. This was in reply to a suggestion by Aflalo that it would be well to have evidence on the point from reliable witnesses. Mr Aflalo sent Mr Jacob's letter on to me, and Mr Jacob and myself had a long correspondence on the matter. Mr Jacob has kindly given me permission to make any use I deem fit of his letters, and what follows is from the correspondence in question.

1. "In your [ie., Aflalo's] interesting article you appear to hint that the evidence of some reliable. witnesses would be not altogether unwelcome.

"I can give you two instances from among my near acquaintance. My father-in-law is one instance and also a next-door neighbour is another-both in a large way of business as farmers, and both well known in the East Kent markets. Neither of these men was likely to be deceived, and equally also neither was likely to deceive in such a matter. Both have declared to me in conversation that they have distinctly witnessed the act of the young vipers being swallowed by the parent, and safely carried off by her. Neither knew the other had spoken to me on the subject, so there could have been no collusion. But what appears to me to be sufficient evidence of the fact is that I have seen it myself. That is to say, although I have not actually witnessed the act of

M

swallowing, I have nevertheless seen the young ones emerge from the parent's gullet, which to my mind is evidence that they had previously entered into it. It was in this way. Some twenty years ago in the month of October, in the early days of that month, I was shooting in a piece of viper - infested, very rough, broken ground in this neighbourhood, when, in a sudden dip a few yards in front of me, my dog, a high-couraged retriever, all at once drew back a pace or two, and with the hair along his back standing straight up, commenced baying some object which I couldn't then see over the slight rise in the ground. I immediately remarked to my son, who was with me, "There's something up!" and rushing forward saw, just over in the hollow, a viper facing the dog. In an instant I took aim and blew the animal's head clean off close by the neck, when, to my amazement, seven young vipers immediately oozed out from the gullet. One of them had a solitary shot through the vertebra; the other six were perfectly sound, and wriggled about in a most lively fashion. They were, roughly speaking, about the size of an ordinary leadpencil. What I should be pleased to know is, if vipers never swallow their young, how did these seven young ones find their way into the old one's gullet?

"My theory is, that my dog, springing suddenly forward over the bank, surprised the parent viper basking with her brood; then they for safety scuttled down her