Merino breed, for as a great authority, namely, Lord Somerville, remarks, “the wool of our Merino sheep after shear-time is hard and coarse to such a degree as to render it almost impossible to suppose that the same animal could bear wool so opposite in quality, compared to that which has been clipped from it: as the cold weather advances, the fleeces recover their soft quality.” As in sheep of all breeds the fleece naturally consists of longer and coarser hair covering shorter and softer wool, the change which it often undergoes in hot climates is probably merely a case of unequal development; for even with those sheep which like goats are covered with hair, a small quantity of underlying wool may always be found.[93] In the wild mountain-sheep (_0vis montana_) of North America there is an analogous annual change of coat; “the wool begins to drop out in early spring, leaving in its place a coat of hair resembling that of the elk, a change of pelage quite different in character from the ordinary thickening of the coat or hair, common to all furred animals in winter,—for instance, in the horse, the cow, etc., which shed their winter coat in the spring.”[94] A slight difference in climate or pasture sometimes slightly affects the fleece, as has been observed even in different districts in England, and is well shown by the great softness of the wool brought from Southern Australia. But it should be observed, as Youatt repeatedly insists, that the tendency to change may generally be counteracted by careful selection. M. Lasterye, after discussing this subject, sums up as follows: “The preservation of the Merino race in its utmost purity at the Cape of Good Hope, in the marshes of Holland, and under the rigorous climate of Sweden, furnishes an additional support of this my unalterable principle, that fine-woolled sheep may be kept wherever industrious men and intelligent breeders exist.”
That methodical selection has effected great changes in several breeds of sheep no one who knows anything on the subject, entertains a doubt. The case of the Southdowns, as improved by Ellman, offers perhaps the most striking instance. Unconscious or occasional selection has likewise slowly produced a great effect, as we shall see in the chapters on Selection. That crossing has largely modified some breeds, no one who will study what has been written on this subject—for instance, Mr. Spooner’s paper—will dispute; but to produce uniformity in a crossed breed, careful selection and “rigorous weeding,” as this author expresses it, are indispensable.[95] In some few instances new breeds have suddenly originated; thus, in 1791, a ram-lamb was born in Massachusetts, having short crooked legs and a long back, like a turnspit-dog. From this one lamb the _otter_ or _ancon_ semi-monstrous breed was raised; as these sheep could not leap over the fences, it was thought that they would be valuable; but they have been supplanted by merinos, and thus exterminated. The sheep are remarkable from transmitting their character so truly that Colonel Humphreys[96] never heard of “but one questionable case” of an ancon ram and ewe not producing ancon offspring. When they are crossed with other breeds the offspring, with rare exceptions, instead of being intermediate in character, perfectly resemble either parent; even one of twins has resembled one parent and the second the other. Lastly, “the ancons have been observed to keep together, separating themselves from the rest of the flock when put into enclosures with other sheep.”
A more interesting case has been recorded in the Report of the Juries for the Great Exhibition (1851), namely, the production of a merino ram-lamb on the Mauchamp farm, in 1828, which was remarkable for its long, smooth, straight, and silky wool. By the year 1833 M. Graux had raised rams enough to serve his whole flock, and after a few more years he was able to sell stock of his new breed. So peculiar and valuable is the wool, that it sells at 25 per cent above the best merino wool: even the fleeces of half-bred animals are valuable, and are known in France as the “Mauchamp-merino.” It is interesting, as showing how generally any marked deviation of structure is accompanied by other deviations, that the first ram and his immediate offspring were of small size, with large heads, long necks, narrow chests, and long flanks; but these blemishes were removed by judicious crosses and selection. The long smooth wool was also correlated with smooth horns; and as horns and hair are homologous structures, we can understand the meaning of this correlation. If the Mauchamp and ancon breeds had originated a century or two ago, we should have had no record of their birth; and many a naturalist would no doubt have insisted, especially in the case of the Mauchamp race, that they had each descended from, or been crossed with, some unknown aboriginal form.
GOATS.
From the recent researches of M. Brandt, most naturalists now believe that all our goats are descended from the _Capra ægagrus_ of the mountains of Asia, possibly mingled with the allied Indian species _C. falconeri_ of India.[97] In Switzerland, during the neolithic period, the domestic goat was commoner than the sheep; and this very ancient race differed in no respect from that now common in Switzerland.[98] At the present time, the many races found in several parts of the world differ greatly from each other; nevertheless, as far as they have been tried,[99] they are all quite fertile when crossed. So numerous are the breeds, that Mr. G.
Clark[100] has described eight distinct kinds imported into the one island of Mauritius. The ears of one kind were enormously developed, being, as measured by Mr. Clark, no less than 19 inches in length and 4-3/4 inches in breadth. As with cattle, the mammæ of those breeds which are regularly milked become greatly developed; and, as Mr. Clark remarks, “it is not rare to see their teats touching the ground.” The following cases are worth notice as presenting unusual points of variation. According to Godron,[101] the mammæ differ greatly in shape in different breeds, being elongated in the common goat, hemispherical in the Angora race, and bilobed and divergent in the goats of Syria and Nubia. According to this same author, the males of certain breeds have lost their usual offensive odour. In one of the Indian breeds the males and females have horns of widely-different shapes;[102] and in some breeds the females are destitute of horns.[103] M. Ramu of Nancy informs me that many of the goats there bear on the upper part of the throat a pair of hairy appendages, 70 mm. in length and about 10 mm. in diameter, which in external appearance resemble those above described on the jaws of pigs. The presence of inter-digital pits or glands on all four feet has been thought to characterise the genus Ovis, and their absence to be characteristic of the genus Capra; but Mr. Hodgson has found that they exist in the front feet of the majority of Himalayan goats.[104] Mr. Hodgson measured the intestines in two goats of the Dúgú race, and he found that the proportional length of the great and small intestines differed considerably. In one of these goats the cæcum was thirteen inches, and in the other no less than thirty-six inches in length!
REFERENCES [1] Hermann von Nathusius ‘Die Racen des Schweines,’ Berlin, 1860; and Rütimeyer, ‘Die Fauna der Pfahlbauten,’ Basel, 1861.
[2] Nathusius, ‘Die Racen des Schweines,’ Berlin, 1860. An excellent appendix is given with references to published and trustworthy drawings of the breeds of each country.
i., s. 505. Several accounts have been published on the fertility of the offspring from wild and tame swine. _See_ Burdach’s ‘Physiology,’ and Godron ‘De l’Espèce,’ tom. i. p. 370. For Africa, ‘Bull. de la Soc. d’Acclimat.’ tom. iv. p. 389. For India, _see_ Nathusius, [4] Sir W. Elliot, Catalogue of Mammalia, ‘Madras Journal of Lit. and Torfschweins,’ 1868. This author believes that the Torfschwein is descended from a distinct species, the _S. sennariensis_ of Central Africa.
[7] Stan. Julien quoted by de Blainville, ‘Ostéographie,’ p. 163.
[12] ‘Proc. Zoolog. Soc.,’ 1862, p. 13. The skull has since been described much more fully by Professor Lucae in a very interesting essay, ‘Der Schädel des Maskenschweines,’ 1870. He confirms the conclusion of von Nathusius on the relationship of this kind of pig.
[13] ‘Journal of Voyages and Travels from 1821 to 1829,’ vol. i. p.
300.
account of the pig of the Shetland Islands.
[16] These woodcuts are copied from engravings given in Mr. S.
Sidney’s excellent edition of ‘The Pig,’ by Youatt, 1860. _ See_ pp.
1, 16, 19.
Compare, also, the figures of the old Irish and the improved Irish breeds in Richardson on ‘The Pig,’ 1847.
[20] Quoted by Isid. Geoffroy, ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 441.
vertebræ, as Mr. Eyton says some might possibly have been lost. I have added together the dorsal and lumbar vertebræ, owing to Prof. Owen’s remarks (‘Journal Linn. Soc.,’ vol. ii. p. 28) on the difference between dorsal and lumbar vertebræ depending only on the development of the ribs. Nevertheless the difference in the number of the ribs in pigs deserves notice. M. Sanson gives the number of lumbar vertebræ in Blainville’s ‘Ostéographie,’ p. 128, for various authorities on this subject.
[25] Eudes-Deslongchamps, ‘Mémoires de la Soc. Linn. de Normandie,’ Crawfurd informs me that the same fact holds good with the wild pigs of the Malay peninsula.
[28] With respect to the several foregoing and following statements on feral pigs, _see_ Roulin, in ‘Mém. présentés par divers Savans a l’Acad.,’ etc., Paris, tom. vi. 1835, p. 326. It should be observed that his account does not apply to truly feral pigs; but to pigs long introduced into the country and living in a half-wild state. For the truly feral pigs of Jamaica, _see_ Gosse’s ‘Sojourn in Jamaica,’ 1851, p. 386; and Col. Hamilton Smith, in ‘Nat. Library,’ vol. ix. p. 93.
With respect to Africa _see_ Livingstone’s ‘Expedition to the Zambesi,’ 1865, p. 153. The most precise statement with respect to the tusks of the West Indian feral boars is by P. Labat (quoted by Roulin); but this author attributes the state of these pigs to descent from a domestic stock which he saw in Spain. Admiral Sulivan, R.N., had ample opportunities of observing the wild pigs on Eagle Islet in the Falklands; and he informs me that they resembled wild boars with bristly ridged backs and large tusks. The pigs which have run wild in the province of Buenos Ayres (Rengger ‘Säugethiere,’ s. 331) have not reverted to the wild type. De Blainville (‘Ostéographie,’ p. 132) refers to two skulls of domestic pigs sent from Patagonia by Al.
d’Orbigny, and he states that they have the occipital elevation of the wild European boar, but that the head altogether is “plus courte et plus ramassée.” He refers, also, to the skin of a feral pig from North America, and says “il ressemble tout à fait à un petit sanglier, mais il est presque tout noir, et peut-être un peu plus ramassé dans ses formes.”
‘Oriental Field Sports.’ Also Col. Hamilton Smith, in ‘Naturalist 29, 30.
and his son Isidore in ‘Hist. Nat. Gen.’ tom. iii. p. 69. Vasey, in his ‘Delineations of the Ox Tribe,’ 1851, p. 127, says the zebu has four, and common ox five, sacral vertebræ. Mr. Hodgson found the ribs either thirteen or fourteen in number; _see_ a note in ‘Indian Field,’ 1858, p. 62.
[33] ‘The Indian Field,’ 1858, p. 74, where Mr. Blyth gives his authorities with respect to the feral humped cattle. Pickering, also, in his ‘Races of Man,’ 1850, p. 274, notices the peculiar grunt-like character of the voice of the humped cattle.
1851, p. 94. The Hungarian cattle descend, according to Rütimeyer [36] Moll and Gayot, ‘La Connaissance Gén. du Bœuf,’ Paris, 1860. Fig.
82 is that of the Podolian breed.
[37] A translation appeared in three parts in the ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.,’ 2nd series, vol. iv., 1849.
26.
[40] W. Boyd Dawkins on the British Fossil Oxen, ‘Journal of the Geolog. Soc.,’ Aug. 1867, p. 182. Also ‘Proc. Phil. Soc. of [42] W. R. Wilde, ‘An Essay on the Animal Remains, etc. Royal Irish [44] Nilsson, in ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.,’ 1849, vol. iv. p.
354.
[45] _See_ W. R. Wilde, ut supra; and Mr. Blyth, in ‘Proc. Irish [47] Isid. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. 96.
[48] Idem, tom. iii. pp. 82, 91.
[51] I am much indebted to the present Earl of Tankerville for information about his wild cattle; and for the skull which was sent to Prof. Rütimeyer. The fullest account of the Chillingham cattle is given by Mr. Hindmarsh, together with a letter by the late Lord Tankerville, in ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.,’ vol. ii., 1839, p.
respect to those of the Duke of Queensberry, _see_ Pennant’s ‘Tour in Animals of Britain,’ 1845, p. 238. For those of Gisburne, _see_ Bewick [52] Boethius was born in 1470; ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.,’ vol.
short-horn cattle. Bell, in his ‘British Quadrupeds,’ p. 423, states that, after long attending to the subject, he has found that white cattle invariably have coloured ears.ote [54] Azara, ‘Quadrupèdes du Paraguay,’ tom. ii. p. 361. Azara quotes Buffon for the feral cattle of Africa. For Texas _ see_ ‘Times,’ Feb.
18th, 1846.
[55] Anson’s Voyage. _See_ Kerr and Porter’s ‘Collection,’ vol. xii.
p. 103.
[56] _See also_ Mr. Mackinnon’s pamphlet on the Falkland Islands, p.
24.
[57] ‘The Age of the Ox, Sheep, Pig,’ etc., by Prof. James Simonds, published by order of the Royal Agricult. Soc.
[58] ‘Ann. Agricult. France,’ April, 1837, as quoted in ‘The Veterinary,’ vol. xii. p. 725. I quote Tessier’s observations from Quatrefages quotes Philippi (‘Revue des Cours Scientifiques,’ Feb. 12, 1688, p. 657), that the cattle of Piacentino have thirteen dorsal vertebræ and ribs in the place of the ordinary number of twelve.
[61] Leguat’s Voyage, quoted by Vasey in his ‘Delineations of the Ox-tribe,’ p. 132.
[63] ‘Mem. de l’Institut présent. par divers Savans,’ tom. vi., 1835, ‘Quadrupèdes du Paraguay,’ tom. ii. pp. 359, 361.
[64] ‘Schweineschädel,’ 1864, s. 104. Nathusius states that the form of skull characteristic in the niata cattle occasionally appears in European cattle; but he is mistaken, as we shall hereafter see, in supposing that these cattle do not form a distinct race. Prof. Wyman, of Cambridge, United States, informs me that the common cod-fish presents a similar monstrosity, called by the fishermen “bull-dog cod.” Prof. Wyman also concluded, after making numerous inquiries in La Plata, that the niata cattle transmit their peculiarities or form a race.
[66] ‘Descriptive Cat. of Ost. Collect. of College of Surgeons,’ 1853, p. 624. Vasey in his ‘Delineations of the Ox-tribe’ has given a figure of this skull; and I sent a photograph of it to Prof. Rütimeyer.
figures are given of the animal, its hoofs, eye, and dewlap.
[68] Low, ‘Domesticated Animals of the British Isles,’ p. 264.
[70] Idem, pp. 304, 368, etc.
[71] ‘Youatt on Cattle,’ p. 193. A full account of this bull is taken from Marshall.
[72] ‘Youatt on Cattle,’ p. 116. Lord Spencer has written on this same subject.
[73] Blyth, on the genus Ovis, in ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. History,’ vol. vii., 1841, p. 261. With respect to the parentage of the breeds _see_ Mr. Blyth’s excellent articles in ‘Land and Water,’ 1867, pp.
[74] Dr. L. Fitzinger, ‘Ueber die Racen des Zahmen Schafes,’ 1860, s.
86.
[75] J. Anderson, ‘Recreations in Agriculture and Natural History,’ vol. ii. p. 264.
[78] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Soc. of Bengal,’ vol.xvi. pp. 1007, 1016.
[83] ‘Journal Asiat. Soc. of Bengal,’ vol. xvi., 1847, pp. 1015, 1016.
remarks in ‘Gardener’s Chronicle,’ 1858, p. 868. For experiments in crossing Cheviot sheep with Leicesters _see_ Youatt, p. 325.
p. 214. Translated and therefore approved by a great authority, Mr.
Pusey.
[90] A translation of his paper is given in ‘Bull. Soc. Imp.
Pallas on the fat-tailed sheep I quote from Anderson’s account of the ‘Sheep of Russia,’ 1794, p. 34. With respect to the Crimean sheep _see_ Pallas’ ‘Travels’ (Eng. trans.) vol. ii. p. 454. For the [92] _See_ Report of the Directors of the Sierra Leone Company, as quoted in White’s ‘Gradation of Man,’ p. 95. With respect to the change which sheep undergo in the West Indies _ see also_ Dr. Davy, in ‘Edin. New. Phil. Journal,’ Jan. 1852. For the statement made by Roulin, _see_ ‘Mém. de l’Institut présent. par divers Savans,’ tom.
vi., 1835, p. 347.
[93] ‘Youatt on Sheep,’ p. 69, where Lord Somerville is quoted. _See_ p. 117 on the presence of wool under the hair. With respect to the fleeces of Australian sheep, p. 185. On selection counteracting any [94] Audubon and Bachman, ‘The Quadrupeds of North America,’ 1846, vol. v. p. 365.
[95] ‘Journal of R. Agricult. Soc. of England,’ vol. xx., part ii., W.
C. Spooner on cross-Breeding.
[97] Isidore Geoffroy St. Hilaire, ‘Hist. Nat. Générale,’ tom. iii. p.
similar conclusion, but he thinks that certain Eastern races may perhaps be in part descended from the Asiatic markhor.
[100] ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. History,’ vol ii. (2nd series), 1848, p. 363.
[101] ‘De l’Espèce,’ tom. i. p. 406. Mr. Clark also refers to differences in the shape of the mammæ. Godron states that in the Nubian race the scrotum is divided into two lobes; and Mr. Clark gives a ludicrous proof of this fact, for he saw in the Mauritius a male goat of the Muscat breed purchased at a high price for a female in full milk. These differences in the scrotum are probably not due to descent from distinct species: for Mr. Clark states that this part varies much in form.
[102] Mr. Clark, ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.,’ vol. ii. (2nd [104] ‘Journal of Asiatic Soc. of Bengal,’ vol. xvi., 1847, pp. 1020, 1025.
CHAPTER IV. DOMESTIC RABBITS.
DOMESTIC RABBITS DESCENDED FROM THE COMMON WILD RABBIT—ANCIENT BREEDS—FLUCTUATING CHARACTERS—ORIGIN OF THE HIMALAYAN BREED—CURIOUS CASE OF INHERITANCE—FERAL RABBITS IN JAMAICA AND THE FALKLAND OF HALF-LOP RABBITS—VARIATIONS IN THE SKULL ANALOGOUS TO DIFFERENCES IN DIFFERENT SPECIES OF HARES—VERtebræ—STERNUM—SCAPULA—EFFECTS OF USE AND DISUSE ON THE PROPORTIONS OF THE LIMBS AND BODY—CAPACITY OF THE SKULL AND REDUCED SIZE OF THE BRAIN—SUMMARY ON THE MODIFICATIONS OF DOMESTICATED RABBITS.
All naturalists, with, as far as I know, a single exception, believe that the several domestic breeds of the rabbit are descended from the common wild species; I shall therefore describe them more carefully than in the previous cases. Professor Gervais[1] states “that the true wild rabbit is smaller than the domestic; its proportions are not absolutely the same; its tail is smaller; its ears are shorter and more thickly clothed with hair; and these characters, without speaking of colour, are so many indications opposed to the opinion which unites these animals under the same specific denomination.” Few naturalists will agree with this author that such slight differences are sufficient to separate as distinct species the wild and domestic rabbit. How extraordinary it would be, if close confinement, perfect tameness, unnatural food, and careful breeding, all prolonged during many generations, had not produced at least some effect! The tame rabbit has been domesticated from an ancient period. Confucius ranges rabbits among animals worthy to be sacrificed to the gods, and, as he prescribes their multiplication, they were probably at this early period domesticated in China. They are mentioned by several of the classical writers. In 1631 Gervaise Markham writes, “You shall not, as in other cattell, looke to their shape, but to their richnesse, onely elect your buckes, the largest and goodliest conies you can get; and for the richnesse of the skin, that is accounted the richest which hath the equallest mixture of blacke and white haire together, yet the blacke rather shadowing the white; the furre should be thicke, deepe, smooth, and shining;...they are of body much fatter and larger, and, when another skin is worth two or three pence, they are worth two shillings.” From this full description we see that silver-grey rabbits existed in England at this period; and what is far more important, we see that the breeding or selection of rabbits was then carefully attended to.
Aldrovandi, in 1637, describes, on the authority of several old writers (as Scaliger, in 1557), rabbits of various colours, some “like a hare,” and he adds that P. Valerianus (who died a very old man in 1558) saw at Verona rabbits four times bigger than ours.[2] From the fact of the rabbit having been domesticated at an ancient period, we must look to the northern hemisphere of the Old World, and to the warmer temperate regions alone, for the aboriginal parent-form; for the rabbit cannot live without protection in countries as cold as Sweden, and, though it has run wild in the tropical island of Jamaica, it has never greatly multiplied there.
It now exists, and has long existed, in the warmer temperate parts of Europe, for fossil remains have been found in several countries.[3] The domestic rabbit readily becomes feral in these same countries, and when variously coloured kinds are turned out they generally revert to the ordinary grey colour.[4] Wild rabbits, if taken young, can be domesticated, though the process is generally very troublesome.[5] The various domestic races are often crossed, and are believed to be quite fertile together, and a perfect gradation can be shown to exist from the largest domestic kinds, having enormously developed ears, to the common wild kind.
The parent-form must have been a burrowing animal, a habit not common, as far as I can discover, to any other species in the large genus Lepus. Only one wild species is known with certainty to exist in Europe; but the rabbit (if it be a true rabbit) from Mount Sinai, and likewise that from Algeria, present slight differences; and these forms have been considered by some authors as specifically distinct.[6] But such slight differences would aid us little in explaining the more considerable differences characteristic of the several domestic races. If the latter are the descendants of two or more closely allied species, these, with the exception of the common rabbit, have been exterminated in a wild state; and this is very improbable, seeing with what pertinacity this animal holds its ground. From these several reasons we may infer with safety that all the domestic breeds are the descendants of the common wild species. But from what we hear of the marvellous success in France in rearing hybrids between the hare and rabbit,[7] it is possible, though not probable, from the great difficulty in making the first cross, that some of the larger races, which are coloured like the hare, may have been modified by crosses with this animal. Nevertheless, the chief differences in the skeletons of the several domestic breeds cannot, as we shall presently see, have been derived from a cross with the hare.
There are many breeds which transmit their characters more or less truly. Every one has seen the enormous lop-eared rabbits exhibited at our shows; various allied sub-breeds are reared on the Continent, such as the so-called Andalusian, which is said to have a large head with a round forehead, and to attain a greater size than any other kind; another large Paris breed is named the Rouennais, and has a square head; the so-called Patagonian rabbit has remarkably short ears and a large round head. Although I have not seen all these breeds, I feel some doubt about there being any marked difference in the shape of their skulls.[8] English lop-eared rabbits often weigh 8 pounds or 10 pounds, and one has been exhibited weighing 18 pounds; whereas a full-sized wild rabbit weighs only about 3-1/4 pounds. The head or skull in all the large lop-eared rabbits examined by me is much longer relatively to its breadth than in the wild rabbit. Many of them have loose transverse folds of skin or dewlaps beneath the throat, which can be pulled out so as to reach nearly to the ends of the jaws. Their ears are prodigiously developed, and hang down on each side of their faces.
A rabbit was exhibited in 1867 with its two ears, measured from the tip of one to the tip of the other, 22 inches in length, and each ear 5-3/8 inches in breadth. In 1869 one was exhibited with ears, measured in the same manner, 23-1/8 in length and 5-1/2 in breadth; “thus exceeding any rabbit ever exhibited at a prize show.” In a common wild rabbit I found that the length of two ears, from tip to tip, was 7-5/8 inches, and the breadth only 1-7/8 inch. The weight of body in the larger rabbits, and the development of their ears, are the qualities which win prizes, and have been carefully selected.
The hare-coloured, or, as it is sometimes called, the Belgian rabbit, differs in nothing except colour from the other large breeds; but Mr. J. Young, of Southampton, a great breeder of this kind, informs me that the females, in all the specimens examined by him, had only six mammæ and this certainly was the case with two females which came into my possession. Mr. B. P. Brent, however, assures me that the number is variable with other domestic rabbits.
The common wild rabbit always has ten mammæ. The Angora rabbit is remarkable from the length and fineness of its fur, which even on the soles of the feet is of considerable length. This breed is the only one which differs in its mental qualities, for it is said to be much more sociable than other rabbits, and the male shows no wish to destroy its young.[9] Two live rabbits were brought to me from Moscow, of about the size of the wild species, but with long soft fur, different from that of the Angora. These Moscow rabbits had pink eyes and were snow-white, excepting the ears, two spots near the nose, the upper and under surface of the tail, and the hinder tarsi, which were blackish-brown. In short, they were coloured nearly like the so-called Himalayan rabbits, presently to be described, and differed from them only in the character of their fur. There are two other breeds which come true to colour, but differ in no other respect, namely silver-greys and chinchillas.
Lastly, the Nicard or Dutch rabbit may be mentioned, which varies in colour, and is remarkable from its small size, some specimens weighing only 1-1/4 pounds; rabbits of this breed make excellent nurses for other and more delicate kinds.[10] Illustration: Fig. 5—Half-lop Rabbit.
Certain characters are remarkably fluctuating, or are very feebly transmitted by domestic rabbits: thus, one breeder tells me that with the smaller kinds he has hardly ever raised a whole litter of the same colour: with the large lop-eared breeds “it is impossible,” says a great judge,[11] “to breed true to colour, but by judicious crossing a great deal may be done towards it. The fancier should know how his does are bred, that is, the colour of their parents.” Nevertheless, certain colours, as we shall presently see, are transmitted truly. The dewlap is not strictly inherited. Lop-eared rabbits, with their ears hanging down flat on each side of the face, do not transmit this character at all truly.
Mr. Delamer remarks that, “with fancy rabbits, when both the parents are perfectly formed, have model ears, and are handsomely marked, their progeny do not invariably turn out the same.” When one parent, or even both, are oar-laps, that is, have their ears sticking out at right angles, or when one parent or both are half-lops, that is, have only one ear dependent, there is nearly as good a chance of the progeny having both ears full-lop, as if both parents had been thus characterised. But I am informed, if both parents have upright ears, there is hardly a chance of a full-lop.
In some half-lops the ear that hangs down is broader and longer than the upright ear;[12] so that we have the unusual case of a want of symmetry on the two sides. This difference in the position and size of the two ears probably indicates that the lopping results from the great length and weight of the ear, favoured no doubt by the weakness of the muscles consequent on disuse.
Anderson[13] mentions a breed having only a single ear; and Professor Gervais another breed destitute of ears.
We come now to the Himalayan breed, which is sometimes called Chinese, Polish, or Russian. These pretty rabbits are white, or occasionally yellow, excepting their ears, nose, feet, and the upper side of the tail, which are all brownish-black; but as they have red eyes, they may be considered as albinoes. I have received several accounts of their breeding perfectly true. From their symmetrical marks, they were at first ranked as specifically distinct, and were provisionally named _L. nigripes._[14] Some good observers thought that they could detect a difference in their habits, and stoutly maintained that they formed a new species. The origin of this breed is so curious, both in itself and as throwing some light on the complex laws of inheritance that it is worth giving in detail. But it is first necessary briefly to describe two other breeds: silver-greys or silver-sprigs generally have black