IS NATURE CRUEL?
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.]
Sra,—Among letters from correspondents in the Spectator I have noticed recently two or three under the heading "Is Nature Cruel ? " the writers in most cases appearing to be against Nature, and the evidence they produce in support of their case is almost wholly confined to the old incident of the domestic cat and the treatment of the mice it catches. But it is unfair to Nature to upset her laws and then blame her for things caused thereby and which she never intended.
In most cases the domestic cat that is seen playing with its victim, a mouse, before eating it, is according to Nature's idea grossly fat and practically unacquainted with a healthy feeling of hunger. The starved, homeless domestic cat that has to depend on its wits for a living is too hungry to play with its victim, besides realizing the risk of loss while the mouse lives. .
I do not think that genuine wild cats play with mice or lizards, and none of the larger cats—tigers, lions, leopards, &e., &c.—are credited with prolonging the life of their, prey once it is captured, the coup de grace being given without delay. It is not Nature, but we human beings, that have developed cruelty in domestic cats by overfeeding and pampering. Wild animals never attain this overfatness ; they put off hunting until their appetite urges them, and when successful in the chase they are too hungry to waste time playing with whatever, they have got.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Barcarole, Longreach, Queensland. F. L. BERNEY.
Previous page
