The head, though finer than that of the European species, is armed with most formidable tusks, with which it is capable of inflicting severe and deadly wounds. Nothing can exceed the savage and determined aspect of a good boar at bay. His limbs, though short, carry him at a great pace, and his endurance is equal to his speed. The tail, it is to be noticed, is always quite straight and tufted. Great numbers are killed by sportsmen, but they are still very numerous, and do considerable damage to the crops, and, as the returns show, are not free from bloodguiltiness. They do not naturally take a place among the creatures destructive to life, but as a certain number of deaths of men and animals are caused by them, they claim this brief passing notice here.

In the deaths of the 1,169 persons assigned to 'other animals' in 1886, I find that 74 were caused by wild boars, but probably the number exceeded that. It is further recorded that of 2,644 cattle killed by other animals,' 46 deaths were caused by wild boars. It appears that 1,002 wild boars were destroyed. These returns are obviously so partial and incomplete that they can be only taken as approximations to the truth.

The crocodile, erroneously called alligator, is destructive to men and cattle, and in some places, such as the Sunderbunds, is very numerous and dangerous, often seizing human beings who come to the river to bathe. Cattle are taken when drinking or swimming across the nullahs. I once saw a man, directly after he had been seized when swimming across a nullah, holding on to a cow's tail. The crocodile caught him by the leg, and with such determination that the limb was severed at the knee-joint; the man, notwithstanding, was dragged on shore, still holding on, though faint and exhausted. He was brought to the hospital at Dacca, and his thigh amputated, but he died of the shock. With their large peg-like teeth they inflict frightful wounds, tearing the flesh and crushing the bones. They seldom relinquish their hold, and the victim is dragged down, drowned, and devoured at leisure. To enable the crocodile to hold its prey under water without swallowing any itself, it has an apparatus of floodgates at the back of its mouth, composed of flaps, which meet and completely close the passage. The nostrils are on the surface of the snout; they close like valves, and the creature can remain long enough under water to drown any animal. There are three species found in Indian waters: C. biporcatus or porosus, C. palustris, and C. pondicerianus. They are known as Muggurs, Kumbeers; whilst the Gavial or Gharial, Gavialis gangeticus, is called Nakir, Gharial, Goh, &c. This saurian, though generally a fish-eater, has been known to kill men; the remains of human beings, ornaments of women and children, have been found in its stomach. I once saw a man who had been bitten by a gharial, when I was travelling in India with H.R.H. the

Duke of Edinburgh in 1870. The following is an extract from my diary :

'Before leaving camp this morning a camel-man was brought in with a severe wound in the left thigh; he was wading across the Mohan when he was suddenly seized by a large gharial, and dragged down. Some sepoys went to the rescue, and one of them so severely wounded the creature that it let go and tried to make its escape. The man followed, thrusting his bayonet into it, and having fired all his (six) cartridges, clubbed his musket, and belaboured it until the stock was broken. The brute, by this time, was so far hors de combat that it turned over as though dead, was dragged on shore, and brought into camp with the injured man, from whom a portion of integument, about five inches in circumference, had been torn away, leaving a severe wound. The gharial was sixteen feet in length. On being opened the stomach was found empty, with the exception of a number of pebbles from the size of a marble to that of a hen's egg. These are useful in digestion, and are probably always found in the stomach of the gharial. The incident settles the question whether the gharial takes other food than fish.'

The curator of the Riddell Museum, Agra, reported that the following had been found in the stomach of a large gharial taken near that city:-'About a dozen large bunches of hair (probably human), sixty-eight pebbles, averaging in size from nearly three inches to one inch in diameter, one large bangle, twenty-four fragments of vitreous armlets, five bronze finger-rings, one small silver neck-charm (a small defaced coin with a metal loop), one gold bead, one largish bead of black stone, thirty small red necklace-beads.' These things, says the reporter, must have been on the body of some woman, if not more than one, who had been devoured. These facts prove that the gharial sometimes preys upon human beings.

The difference between the crocodile and alligator is chiefly this: the head of the alligator is broader, the snout shorter, and the arrangement of the teeth not quite the same, while the feet are only semi-palmate. In both, the size of the jaws is tremendous; when opened they close with a powerful snap. I have seen a mortally wounded crocodile close its teeth so firmly on a log of wood that they were with difficulty withdrawn. The teeth are deciduous and renewable, therefore the mouth is always armed. Crocodiles attain a great size, up to fifteen, eighteen, twenty feet or more in length, and are found in many Indian rivers, estuaries, lakes, and tanks, or marshes. All are bloodthirsty creatures; but they are said to be fonder of carrion than of fresh food. The larger species, C. biporcatus, is found near the sea and in the large rivers and Sunderbunds. C. palustris, which is smaller, occurs in the swamps and pools. The gharial is more of a fish-eater, has a very different head and mouth, the jaws being long

and narrow, with rows of closely-set teeth. It occurs in the rivers high up, even to near the foot of the hills, or in the rapids.

The shark, Carcharias gangeticus, is a fierce and bold fish, ascending the Hooghly, doubtless as far as the tidal water flows, especially during the season when the freshets from the hills fill the river. It occasionally seizes people at the bathing ghâts, though it does not often succeed in carrying off the victim, who is generally rescued by other bathers, but inflicts dangerous, often mortal, wounds. It is usually in April or May that these accidents occur near the ghâts where formerly the dead were thrown into the water, and where the sharks were wont to seek their food. Since municipal arrangements have provided for the complete cremation of all human bodies brought to the ghâts, that supply of food for the sharks has failed, and they have turned their attention to the living at the neighbouring bathing ghâts. Up to 1872, when I left Calcutta, no precaution had been taken to prevent these accidents. The staking off a portion of the ghât, as is done in the Sunderbunds, against crocodiles, would be sufficient; but, simple as the expedient is, it had not been resorted to. The people go on bathing at the same places perfectly unconcerned. Indeed, shortly after a person has been bitten, the ghât is again fully occupied by bathers.

Among the deaths assigned to 'other animals' in 1886, 237 human beings and only 17 cattle were ascribed to crocodiles; the latter is probably far from representing the real mortality. It is satisfactory to read that 628 crocodiles were destroyed. One human death is assigned to a shark, and the report states that 502 sharks were destroyed in the Hooghly at Calcutta. This is the only instance where one feels moved to raise the question of possible exaggeration.

Having described or enumerated the animals which destroyed so many human lives during 1886, it remains only to give such statistics of the 'other animals, and their victims as the information available will admit of. The returns show that 1,169 persons and 2,644 head of cattle were killed by them, and, as far as the imperfect information afforded goes, it would appear that the character and distribution of the destroyed and the destroyers were as follows:

6

In the case of 204 persons killed by other animals' it is not stated what the animals were; but of the remainder, 1 death was due to a panther, 74 to wild boars, 3 to bison, 29 to buffaloes, 554 to jackals, 18 to mad jackals, 4 to dogs, 22 to mad dogs, 1 to a mad camel, 3 to bulls, 1 to a bear, 1 to a wasp, 1 to a shark, 2 to wild cats, 1 to a nilgai, 237 to crocodiles, and 13 to scorpions: 41 of these deaths were due to hydrophobia.

Of the 2,644 cattle killed, in 2,199 cases it is not stated what the animals were that caused death; but of the remainder, 46 were attributed to wild boars, 6 to buffaloes, 133 to jackals, 37 to mad jackals, VOL. XXVI.-No. 150.

R

195 to dogs, 17 to crocodiles, 3 to panthers, 7 to black leopards, and 1 to a wild cat: 37 of the deaths were due to hydrophobia.

6

Of 6,852 other animals' destroyed, 3,098 are not specified; 5 were panthers, 1,002 wild boars, 140 jackals, 1,467 dogs, 9 scorpions, 1 mad camel, 502 sharks (in Calcutta), 628 crocodiles.

The term cattle' may be taken to include buffaloes, oxen, camels, goat, sheep, horses, ponies, and donkeys. In some of the returns only the larger animals, in others the goats and sheep also, are included. Of course, the foregoing details give only an approximation to the real numbers, but sufficient to show that the destruction of life and property is great.

The returns of 1887, when compared with those of past years, do not show much improvement, for wild animals still abound in many localities, and human beings are killed by them at about the same rate as during former years. Evidently, then, further preventive measures are needed, and the question it concerns us to ask is, what can be done to mitigate, if not altogether obviate this, to some extent, preventible evil, which, however, is not so easily dealt with as might be imagined. Government aid is needed, but the people should bestir themselves and rely more on their own resources, for the evil cannot be stayed whilst they are apathetic, and predacious animals continue to abound. 'Tigers must prey,' and as long as they exist in such numbers as at present, men and cattle will be their victims.

Government may give rewards for and otherwise aid in the destruction of noxious animals, but until the people do something towards protecting themselves, they will continue to suffer. As education makes them more self-confident and less superstitious, as civilisation extends cultivation and diffuses humanising influences, it is to be hoped that wild beasts will gradually diminish, when men, ceasing to worship, will help to exterminate, the creatures which destroy them. Meanwhile, all reasonable help should be given in preserving life and property. Sanitary science has reduced the death-rate from disease in the British army in India to one-fourth of its former proportions; were this death-cause dealt with in the same vigorous spirit, there can be little doubt that the results would be equally satisfactory. Like many other public questions, it is one— though not entirely-of money, and more expenditure may be required before the evil can be overcome.

A variety of measures have, at different times, been resorted to with a certain amount of success. The subject was well worthy of Government help, for it is of national importance that measures should be devised for diminishing this loss of life. It would be difficult to estimate the value of property destroyed, for that of 55,000 head of cattle is not the mere money value alone, but represents food lost and tillage prevented; and who can pretend to formulate the money equivalent -albeit life has never been set very high in India-of 25,000 human

lives? But one may imagine the despondency and desolation of the survivors, the deteriorating effect on cultivation and the industrial energy of the communities which sustain these losses, as well as the paralysing effects on progress, comfort, and prosperity.

Without relating all that has been done in the past, it is right to say that measures of some kind have long been in force for the destruction of noxious animals. In March 1864, the Secretary of State, noticing the destruction caused by tigers, wolves, and other wild animals, thought it not improbable that the failure of rewards in producing the desired effect might be owing to the villagers being deprived of arms through the operation of the general Disarming Act. He therefore commended the subject to the consideration of the Government of India, and desired that, if deemed necessary, the inhabitants of those villages which suffered most from the ravages of wild beasts, might be allowed to retain such arms as were necessary for the protection of themselves and their property. This despatch being circulated throughout the Government of Bengal, to the several Divisional Commissioners in the Lower Provinces, a discussion took place as to the adequacy or otherwise of the authorised rewards, resulting in some cases in their enhancement. The Bengal Government suggested that strychnine might be used without risk, by being introduced into the body of a cow or other animal after it had been killed by a tiger. But nothing was said to lead to the conclusion that the operation of the Arms Act had contributed to aggravate the evils complained of.

It would occupy too much space to recount all the enactments respecting rewards offered for the destruction of wild animals during past years; suffice it to say that it has been the subject of frequent resolutions and orders. In some districts, where left to the discretion of local authorities, its importance has been differently estimated according to the circumstances of the locality or the views of the administrators. No doubt, good has been and probably more would have been done, had there been better organisation of the methods for attaining the desired object. A resolution published a few years ago seems in principle to provide for all that is required.

The papers now before the Government of India conclusively establish the fact that the evil is a very serious one. The loss of life, though probably not quite accurately reported (it is understated) is certainly enormous. Nowhere is the destruction of life by wild beasts so great as in the Lower Provinces of Bengal. In other provinces, as cultivation and civilisation have advanced, wild beasts have diminished in numbers. In the Punjab and in most parts of Bombay, the presence of the more dangerous species is now stated to have become exceedingly rare. In the opinion of the Governor-General in Council, this serious mortality could be very largely reduced by the extirpation of these animals in the neighbourhood of human habitations. This should be first attempted, and every reasonable means be taken to secure their destruction whenever they make their appearance near towns or villages. The system of rewards hitherto in force in all the provinces seems to be the most effective means by which the Government can accelerate the work, and