phor laid before the entrance of their hive, I tried the effect of bringing some camphor towards their mouths while their tongues were plunged into some honey placed on a card. All of them took flight, but after flying about for some time, they ventured to alight near the honey. While they were tempted again to try it, I threw some bits of camphor on the surface, They drew back a little, still keeping the tip of their tongues amongst the honey, and carefully avoided the camphor. One vibrated its wings as it fed, while some were less affected, and others not at all; but when I covered the honey entirely with camphor, they all instantly flew away. I had this card carried to my hives, while some honey was put on another elean one within reach of the bees. The latter was soon discovered, and the honey consumed in a few minutes; but an hour elapsed before a single bee came near the camphorated card, when, at length, two ventured to alight on it, and thrust their tongues into the edge of a drop of honey. Others followed, and two hours after it was covered with them, and all the honey consumed, the camphor alone remaining, whence it was proved, that the attraction of honey overcomes their repugnance to the smell of camphor*."

Huber also tried the effect of alcohol upon bees shut up in a close vessel. Having allowed a small glass of spirits of wine to evaporate under a receiver, he placed in it a bee that had just been satiated with honey. It endeavoured to escape, and vibrated its wings incessantly for an hour, when a continued tremor of the limbs, the wings, and the sucker became perceptible, and, at length, unable to stand, it lay down on its back, and began to use its wings like oars or feet, at the same time disgorging all the honey it had previously swallowed, Window * Huber on Bees, p. 267,

flies and wood-lice (Onisci) were destroyed by the same vapour, but it did not seem to affect a large spider.

We shall only mention the effect of the odour of one other substance on bees, namely, their own poison, which Huber was curious to ascertain. The sting of one was accordingly extracted, and presented to some workers before the entrance of a hive. Although they had previously been quiet and tranquil, they became all at once much agitated. None flew away, but two or three darted against the sting, and one furiously assailed the experimenters. That it was the odour of the sting-poison alone which produced these violent emotions, was obvious from their appearing insensible of its presence when it lost its scent by drying. In another instance, bees were confined in a glass tube and irritated with an awn of barley, till they protruded their stings and left some poison on the sides of the glass. The mouth of the tube was then presented to a group of bees at the entrance of a hive, and it soon produced the agitation of rage obviously unaccompanied with fear *.

* Huber, p. 269.

73

CHAPTER IV.

HEARING IN INSECTS.

THE speech of Mamilius, in the Winter's Tale,-
I will tell it softly,

Yon crickets shall not hear it *,

66

66

shows that Shakspeare had a more accurate knowledge of insects, than two of our most distinguished naturalists-Linnæus and Bonnet, who are disposed. to deny that insects can hear at all. Passing by a hedge," says the latter, upon which there was a nest of common caterpillars (Clisiocampa neustria?), I remarked that the sound of my voice appeared to incommode them, for when I spoke they briskly agitated with repeated jerks (reprises) the fore-part of their bodies. I did not indeed suppose that they possessed an organ of hearing,-I know no observation which proves insects to be endowed with this sense, but I conjectured with more probability, that the sound of my voice was communicated to the organ of touch in the caterpillars, a fact which proves that they have a very delicate touch t."

It would have been well, however, if Bonnet had made sure of the fact before theorizing upon it, as it appears to us he must have been mistaken, and might have seen the lackeys jerking themselves in the same way, altogether independent of the sound of his voice. We have repeatedly watched by the hour these caterpillars repeating the jerks in question, when it could *Winter's Tale, Act ii., Sc. 1. + Bonnet, Œuvres, ii, 36.

H

Lackey moth (Clisiocampa neustria), in all its stages. a, spiral chain of eggs; b, larva; c, pupa, in a cocoon; d, moth.

It

not possibly be in consequence of any sound. seemed more for the purpose of producing a rent in the skin near the head*, as it was more remarkable

* See Insect Transformations, p, 169.

just before their moulting than at any other time*. This also, as it happens, was the very period when Bonnet made his observation, as he expressly says, some of them had undergone, and others were about to undergo their first moult."

66

Bonnet imagined, however, that he had proved his opinion by a similar experiment upon caterpillars of another species, which also live in society a part of their lives. "While they were exposed," he says, "to a burning sun, and ran quickly from one side to another, I bethought myself of ringing a small bell at a very short distance from the nest: some of them stopt instantly and briskly agitated the fore-part of their bodies, as if they felt the sound of the bell disagreeable t." It is unfortunate that, from Bonnet's inattention to system, we cannot tell the species of the caterpillars on which the experiment was tried; but we have repeated it in a number of cases, both with social and solitary caterpillars, without being able to verify his observations. At the time of writing this, we tried the effect of a great variety of sounds upon a nest of the brown-tail moth (Porthesia auriflua)-most probably Bonnet's species-soon after their first moult, but we were unable either in the sun or the shade to produce any effect upon them by sounds; and several full-grown caterpillars of the fox-moth (Lasiocampa Rubi, SCHRANK) in a box beside them appeared equally insensible.

We are thus inclined to explain Bonnet's second experiment as we did the first, though his own account is not improbable; for all caterpillars are rather sensitive, and jerk themselves when touched, particu larly should any of their companions come upon them. In most cases the jerk succeeds in driving away the intruder; but in the cannibal species it only serves as a cause of irritation which leads them to plunge Euvres, ii. 37.

* J. R.