TO THE EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOR.
27th April 1932.
Six-Among the numerous and varied publications which daily issue from our press, it cannot be matter of surprise that erroneous statements, even in that class of books professing to contain a relation of facts, should frequently occur ; and as I consider it a duty which each person owes to the community, to point out (when he can do so with the certainty of correctness derived from practical experience) such errors as fall under his immediate observation, I shall offer no apology for troubling you with the following remarks. In your quotations from a recent publication called JESSE'S Gleanings (see Spectator, 24th March), you have the following passage, introduced by a re- mark of your own, recommending it to the notice of your readers-" It is a well-ascertained fact, that if a cow produces twins, one of which is male and the other a female, the latter is never known to breed." In refutation of this statement, I beg to inform you, that a celebrated breeder of Herefordshire with whom I have the honour of being acquainted (Mr. PRICE, of Poole House;Upton-on-Severn), has at this moment m his possession a cow, which was a twin with a male, and which has already produced two calves. The statement of Mr. JESSE is not, however, altogether without foundation. The real facts are these :-If a cow produce twins, both of which are females, they follow the general order of nature; if the one be a male and the other a female, the latter generally proves barren ; the exceptions being, on an average, not more than one in eight or ten instances. In this case, the order of the birth is said, I know not how truly, to exert some influence. The facts are extremely curious, more especially as I am not aware that in any other race of animals a similar anomaly occurs. I have seen the statement of Mr. JESSE copied into several of the public prints; but the extreme respectability and general excellence of the Spectator have in- duced me to address this communication only to its editor. In your last Number, speaking of the gentleman who writes, or has written, in the Sporting Magazine under the signature of NIMROD, you have given his name AretEwarra: it should have been APPERLEY.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant, A READER OF THE SPECTATOR. *** This little contribution to accuracy in a curious matter of natural history we consider valuable. Our readers, on reference, will observe, that we quoted the passzeteluestion as one which we could not vouch for, but which never- theless claims on attention.
Previous page
