The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1875-10-23
lnstfset and Reason.

Mr.. James HItchings, writing from
Bambury, England, to the London
Nature, gives the following curious &C.
count of the doings of cat i:
A pair OF blackbirds built a nest on
top of my garden wall, which is thickly
covered with ivy, and within three yard:
of the drawing room window. When the
young birds were about three parts
fiedged. one Of them by some mishap left
the flower garden. My cat (seven years
old, and which has killed scores OF
small birdS Immediately found it, and
at the same time kitten, (about three
months old, but not belonging to the cat)
began to pay rather rude attention to
the young blackbird, and would have
used it as kittens are wont, but the old
cat would not suffer her to touch it..
The cause of this was the old cock black.
bird, being aware of the peril ofits young
made great noise and kept flying here
and there around the scene Of action.
crying and scolding with might and
main.
1t then became evident to me that the
cat had two or three objects in view, and
purpose to gain. Firstly, not to allow
the kitten to touch, or kill, or make off
with the young bird. Secondly, to use
the young bird as decoy to entrap the
old one. Thirdly, to make the young
bird cry sufficiently from fear or pain to
induce the parents affection to overcome
its discretion. During his maneuvers
old Tom repeatedly made unsuccessful
springs to catch the cock bird, alternate
ly running to give the kitten lesson Of
patience or self.denial, or a greater fear
of punishment. The young bird repeat
eddy hoped out of sight among the
flowers and stinted its cries, then anon
the cat touched it again and made it
futter about and cry again, which from
time to time brought the old bird down
with cries of terror or wrath, or blend
ing of both emotions, and almost into
the very mouth of the cat. Two or three
times I thought old Tom was successful,
but no, he missed his object most sur
prisingly. 1t became evident to me that
the cat was using the young bird as de-
coy to catch the old one.
After had watched some ten or fif-
teen minutes, it became too painful for
me to witness, so caught the young
bird and put it again into its nest, which
was about ten feet from the ground. In
less than an hour the young bird was
again on the ground, the cat, kitten and
parent bird performing the same drama,
with this difference in the action; the
cat lay down, rolled about or sat con-
venient distance from the young bird,
yet with eyes alert, though halt shut
and otherwise giving an assurance that
he did not intend to make another bound
without succeeding to catch his prey.
He was, however. disappointed, and made
four without achieving his purpose.
At this juHcture the mother bird
came on the stage with cries of distress,
but kept aloof on the branches of
tall cherry tree that rises above the wall;
and if her boldness were less than the
cock-bird's her discretion was greater,
for she kept far aloof Once it seemed
to me that the cock>bird had actually
struck the back or head OF the cat with
his wing and mandible. This scene
continued about seven or ten minutes,
when l caught the young bird and threw
it over the wall, and the exhibition of
animal thought, emotion, and passion
ceased.
Here were manifest phenomena of a
more remarkable kind than those seen
in the cited by the Duke of Argyll in
the Contemporary RerieD for July, in an
article to illustrate "Animal instiEct in
to the Mind of Man" for the
eat showed an amount of reasoning which
ne probably never before exercised, be-
cause never before placed in the same
That he had used young
'parrows, Of which he must have caught
scores, as decoys to catch the old one is
but am perfectly sure that no
Kitten ever was in the garden during his
,eign as monarch of all he surveyed" in
he shape of birds. Hence his authority
,ver the kitten, which was full of life
md eagerness to appropriate tine young
bird, the killing of which would have
defeated the purpose of the cat in using
he young bird as decoy to catch the
I'D one, was indeed remarkable, and dis
.losed a combination of mental forces of
reason of no trifling order,
md, as it appears to me, conclusive that
he difference only difierence-be-
ween instinct and reason is one of de-
,ree.