Thomas Clark of Halesleigh. He cannot, indeed, give personal authority
for what he records; but the confidence of such a man in his informant
is an element not without its value. "March 25, 1859. In the early part
of this month, two live Toads were dug out from the bottom of a bed of
stiff brick clay, in the neighbourhood of Bridgewater, at the depth of
fourteen feet from the surface of the ground; a third was killed by the
spade before they were observed. This bed of clay rests on peat, and the
Toads were found at the junction of the two beds, in a small domed
cavity, about the size of the crown of a man's hat. On being exposed to
the air, they uttered a squeaking cry, resembling that of a rat, but in
about a minute they seemed reconciled to their new destiny, and moved
freely about. They were kept in a jar for a few days, and then placed at
liberty in a garden, where I suppose they are still living. The living
ones were about two inches in length, but narrow in proportion, and of
a rather lighter colour than Toads usually are; the one which was killed
was very much larger. The clay under which they were buried had been
gradually dug out from the surface since about the beginning of the
year, but the last five feet of depth was not dug till the day on which
they were discovered. After about two feet of the surface, the clay is
very close and adhesive, and far too moist to admit of cracks being
formed in it, even in the driest summers."[105]
To this communication inserted in the _Zoologist_, Mr Newman added a
note asking the name of any scientific man who was present at the
exhumation. Mr Clark replies:--"I am unable to give such a name, further
than as the intelligent foreman of the brickyard, Thomas Duddridge, (who
witnessed the exhumation by one of the labourers of the yard,) may be
entitled to the appellation; but no one, however high his scientific
attainments, could be more careful than he was to give me correct
information, or more exact in his statements; and if, after minute
inquiry, I had not been fully satisfied of the correctness of his
account, I should not have sought to occupy the pages of the _Zoologist_
with its recital. On shewing him the notice in the _Zoologist_, he said
it was impossible for anything to be more correct; and he added, that
the little cavity which the Toads occupied was quite smooth in every
part, apparently by their long-continued movements,--as smooth, to use
his own illustration, as the inside of a China bowl."[106]
Numerous experiments have been made with a view to test the possibility
of these reputed facts. If Toads do so commonly become voluntarily or
accidentally immured, and remain without light, food, or even air, for
many years, and yet survive, let us put some Toads into similar
circumstances, keep them shut up, and, after the lapse of a sufficient
interval, examine them, and see whether they are alive or dead.
"_Experimentum faciemus in corpore vili_," as the village doctor said to
his assistant over the sick traveller.
_Probatum est!_ Besides the case mentioned in Mr Bartlett's letter
(_ante_, p. 149), the late Dr Buckland, in November 1825, instituted a
series of careful experiments, which are thus narrated by himself:--"In
one large block of coarse oolitic limestone, twelve circular cells were
prepared, each about one foot deep and five inches in diameter, and
having a groove or shoulder at its upper margin fitted to receive a
circular plate of glass, and a circular slate to protect the glass: the
margin of this double cover was closed round and rendered impenetrable
to air and water by a luting of soft clay. Twelve smaller cells, each
six inches deep and five inches in diameter, were made in another block
of compact siliceous sandstone, viz., the Pennant Grit of the coal
formation near Bristol; these cells also were covered with similar
plates of glass and slate, cemented at the edge by clay. The object of
the glass covers was to allow the animals to be inspected, without
disturbing the clay so as to admit external air or insects into the
cell. The limestone is so porous that it is easily permeable by water,
and probably also by air; the sandstone is very compact.
"On the 26th of November 1825, one live Toad was placed in each of the
above-mentioned twenty-four cells, and the double cover of glass and
slate placed over each of them, and cemented down by the luting of clay.
The weight of each Toad in grains was ascertained and noted by Dr
Daubeny and Mr Dillwyn at the time of their being placed in the cells;
that of the smallest was 115 grains, and of the largest 1185 grains. The
large and small animals were distributed in equal proportion between the
limestone and sandstone cells.
"These blocks of stone were buried together in my garden beneath three
feet of earth, and remained unopened until the 10th of December 1826, on
which day they were examined. Every Toad in the smaller cells of the
compact sandstone was dead, and the bodies of most of them so much
decayed that they must have been dead some months. The greater number of
those in the larger cells of porous limestone were alive. No. 1, whose
weight when immured was 924 grains, now weighed only 698 grains. No. 5,
whose weight when immured was 1185 grains, now weighed 1265 grains. The
glass cover over this cell was slightly cracked, so that minute insects
might have entered: none, however, were discovered in this cell; but in
another cell whose glass was broken, and the animal within it dead,
there was a large assemblage of minute insects; and a similar assemblage
also on the outside of the glass of a third cell. In cell No. 9, a Toad
which when put in weighed 988 grains, had increased to 1116 grains, and
the glass cover over it was entire; but as the luting of the cell within
which this Toad had increased in weight was not particularly examined,
it is probable there was some aperture in it by which small insects
found admission. No. 11 had decreased from 936 grains to 652 grains.
"When they were first examined in December 1826, not only were all the
small Toads dead, but the larger ones appeared much emaciated, with the
two exceptions above mentioned; we have already stated that these
probably owed their increased weight to the insects which had found
access to the cells, and become their food.
"The death of every individual of every size in the smaller cells of
compact sandstone, appears to have resulted from a deficiency in the
supply of air, in consequence of the smallness of the cells, and the
impermeable nature of the stone; the larger volume of air originally
inclosed in the cells of the limestone, and the porous nature of the
stone itself, (permeable as it is slowly by water, and probably by air,)
seem to have favoured the duration of life to the animals inclosed in
them without food.
"It should be noticed that there is a defect in these experiments,
arising from the treatment of the twenty-four Toads before they were
inclosed in the blocks of stone. They were shut up and buried on the
26th of November, but the greater number of them had been caught more
than two months before that time, and had been imprisoned all together
in a cucumber frame placed on common garden earth, where the supply of
food to so many individuals was probably scanty, and their confinement
unnatural, so that they were in an unhealthy and somewhat meagre state
at the time of their imprisonment. We can therefore scarcely argue with
certainty from the death of all these individuals within two years, as
to the duration of life which might have been maintained had they
retired spontaneously, and fallen into the torpor of their natural
hibernation in good bodily condition.
"The results of our experiments amount to this: all the Toads, both
large and small, inclosed in sandstone, and the small Toads in the
limestone also, were dead at the end of thirteen months. Before the
expiration of the second year all the large ones also were dead; these
were examined several times during the second year through the glass
covers of the cells, but without removing them to admit air; they
appeared always awake, with their eyes open, and never in a state of
torpor, their meagreness increasing at each interval in which they were
examined, until at length they were found dead; those two also which had
gained an accession of weight at the end of the first year, and were
then carefully closed up again, were emaciated and dead before the
expiration of the second year.
"At the same time that these Toads were inclosed in stone, four other
Toads of middling size were inclosed in three holes, cut for this
purpose on the north side of the trunk of an apple-tree; two being
placed in the largest cell, and each of the others in a single cell.
The cells were nearly circular, about five inches deep and three inches
in diameter; they were carefully closed up with a plug of wood, so as to
exclude access of insects, and apparently were air-tight; when examined
at the end of a year, every one of the Toads was dead, and their bodies
were decayed.
"From the fatal result of the experiments made in the small cells cut in
the apple-tree and the block of compact sandstone, it seems to follow
that Toads cannot live a year excluded totally from atmospheric air;
and, from the experiments in the larger cells within the block of
oolitic limestone, it seems also probable that they cannot survive two
years entirely excluded from food; we may therefore conclude that there
is a want of sufficiently minute and accurate observation in those so
frequently recorded cases, where Toads are said to be found alive within
blocks of stone and wood, in cavities that had no communication whatever
with the external air. The fact of my two Toads having increased in
weight at the end of the year, notwithstanding the care that was taken
to inclose them perfectly by a luting of clay, shews how very small an
aperture will admit of insects sufficient to maintain life. In the cell
No. 5, where the glass was slightly cracked, the communication though
small was obvious, but in the cell No. 9, where the glass cover remained
entire, and where it appears certain, from the increased weight of the
inclosed animal, that insects must have found admission, we have an
example of these minute animals finding their way into a cell to which
great care had been taken to prevent any possibility of access.
"Admitting, then, that Toads are occasionally found in cavities of wood
and stone with which there is no communication sufficiently large to
allow the ingress and egress of the animal inclosed in them, we may, I
think, find a solution of such phenomena in the habits of these
reptiles, and of the insects which form their food. The first effort of
the young Toad, as soon as it has left its tadpole state and emerged
from the water, is to seek shelter in holes and crevices of rocks and
trees. An individual which, when young, may have thus entered a cavity
by some very narrow aperture, would find abundance of food by catching
insects, which, like itself, seek shelter within such cavities; and may
soon have increased so much in bulk as to render it impossible to get
out again through the narrow aperture at which it entered. A small hole
of this kind is very likely to be overlooked by common workmen, who are
the only people whose operations on stone and wood disclose cavities in
the interior of such substances.
"In the case of Toads, Snakes, and Lizards, that occasionally issue from
stones that are broken in a quarry, or in sinking wells, and sometimes
even from strata of coal at the bottom of a coal-mine, the evidence is
never perfect to shew that the reptiles were entirely inclosed in solid
rock. No examination is ever made until the reptile is first discovered
by the breaking of the mass in which it was contained, and then it is
too late to ascertain, without carefully replacing every fragment, (and
in no case that I have seen reported has this ever been done,) whether
or not there was any hole or crevice by which the animal may have
entered the cavity from which it was extracted. Without previous
examination it is almost impossible to prove that there was no such
communication. In the case of rocks near the surface of the earth, and
in stone quarries, reptiles find ready admission to holes and fissures.
We have a notorious example of this kind in the Lizard found in a
chalk-pit, and brought alive to the late Dr Clark. In the case also of
wells and coal-pits, a reptile that had fallen down the well or shaft,
and survived its fall, would seek its natural retreat in the first hole
or crevice it could find, and the miner dislodging it from this cavity,
to which his previous attention had not been called, might in ignorance
conclude that the animal was coeval with the stone from which he had
extracted it.
"It remains only to consider the case (of which I know not any
authenticated example) of Toads that have been said to be found in
cavities within blocks of limestone, to which, on careful examination,
no access whatever could be discovered, and where the animal was
absolutely and entirely closed up with stone. Should any such case ever
have existed, it is probable that the communication between this cavity
and the external surface had been closed up by stalactitic incrustation,
after the animal had become too large to make its escape. A similar
explanation may be offered of the much more probable case of a live Toad
being entirely surrounded with solid wood. In each case, the animal
would have continued to increase in bulk so long as the smallest
aperture remained by which air and insects could find admission; it
would probably become torpid as soon as this aperture was entirely
closed by the accumulation of stalactite or the growth of wood. But it
still remains to be ascertained how long this state of torpor may
continue under total exclusion from food and from external air: and,
although the experiments above recorded shew that life did not extend
two years in the case of any one of the individuals which formed the
subjects of them, yet, for reasons which have been specified, they are
not decisive to shew that a state of torpor, or suspended animation, may
not be endured for a much longer time by Toads that are healthy and well
fed up to the moment when they are finally cut off from food, and from
all direct access of atmospheric air.
"The common experiment of burying a Toad in a flower-pot covered with a
tile, is of no value unless the cover be carefully luted to the pot, and
the hole at the bottom of the pot also closed, so as to exclude all
possible access of air, earthworms, and insects. I have heard of two or
three experiments of this kind, in which these precautions have not been
taken, and in which at the end of a year the Toads have been found alive
and well.
"Besides the Toads inclosed in wood and stone, four others were placed
each in a small basin of plaster of Paris, four inches deep and five
inches in diameter, having a cover of the same material carefully luted
round with clay; these were buried at the same time and in the same
place with the blocks of stone, and on being examined at the same time
with them in December 1826, two of the Toads were dead, the other two
alive, but much emaciated. We can only collect from this experiment,
that a thin plate of plaster of Paris is permeable to air in a
sufficient degree to maintain the life of a Toad for thirteen months.
"In the 19th Vol., No. I, p. 167, of _Sillimans American Journal of
Science and Arts_, David Thomas, Esq. has published some observations on
Frogs and Toads in stone and solid earth, enumerating several authentic
and well-attested cases. These, however, amount to no more than a
repetition of the facts so often stated and admitted to be true, viz.,
that torpid reptiles occur in cavities of stone, and at the depth of
many feet in soil and earth; but they state not anything to disprove the
possibility of a small aperture, by which these cavities may have had
communication with the external surface, and insects have been admitted.
"The attention of the discoverer is always directed more to the Toad
than to the minutiae of the state of the cavity in which it was
contained."
The importance of these experiments, the care with which they were
instituted, the deserved reputation of the experimenter, and the
philosophic character of his inferences, will, I trust, apologise for
the extent of this quotation. I do not think, however, that the question
is settled by them; and I will venture to make one or two comments on
the facts and on the observations.
Dr Buckland allows that the circumstances of the incarceration of his
Toads were not natural. This seems to me an element of more importance
than he attributes to it. They were shut up while in active life, after
having been confined for two months on scanty food;--"So that they were
in an _unhealthy and somewhat meagre_ state at the time of their
imprisonment." We do not know what conditions, what natural provisions
precede torpidity and are essential to it; but possibly there are some,
which in these cases were compulsorily precluded by human interference.
It is stated that the animals that survived to the second year were
always found awake when examined,--"_never in a state of torpor_." But
Toads that had hid themselves would have been torpid during the winter
months; and thus we have a sufficient proof that a natural condition of
body had been by some means prevented. The experiment would be much more
fair to the Toad, and much more conclusive to me, if the animal were
inclosed during the depth of its winter-sleep, care being taken to
handle it as little as possible.
As it was, however, _most of the Toads_ inclosed in the limestone
_survived upwards of thirteen months_. This surely is a very remarkable
fact. Take the case of No. 9. Here was a Toad, nearly full grown, which
had been shut up in a stone cell, covered with a plate of glass
carefully luted down all round, so as to exclude air, buried under three
feet of earth, so as to exclude the smallest gleam of light; yet, at the
expiration of thirteen months, the cell being examined in winter, when
normally all Toads ought to be sound asleep, this Toad was wide awake,
not in the least emaciated, but so thriving in its strange dungeon as
actually to have made 128 grains of flesh! to have actually increased in
weight at the rate of 12-1/2 per cent.!
Dr Buckland says, "It is probable there was some aperture in the luting
by which small insects found admission." But this is altogether a
_petitio principii_: it absolutely begs the question at issue. Are not
these insects entirely gratuitous? The luting was, of course, carefully
laid on: there could be no drying to cause contraction, buried as it was
in the earth; the glass was uninjured; no orifice was detected; and yet,
forsooth, it must be assumed that "small insects found admission." Then,
too, consider the problem. It is not the possibility that a
microscopically minute insect or two may have managed in some
inscrutable way to insinuate themselves, but insects sufficient to
support this large Toad for thirteen months, and to make it at the end
of that time 128 grains heavier than it was when first inclosed! There
is the fact, as stated by this careful observer; and I am sure his
hypothesis of intrusive insects will not account for it.
I might make similar remarks on No. 5. The glass was "_slightly_
cracked." No insects were discovered in it; nor is any perceptible
orifice alluded to; yet this Toad had increased from 1185 grains to 1265
grains. The "_slight_ crack" in the glass makes this example less
remarkable at first sight than the other; but in reality it is equally
inscrutable. Insects, however minute, do not pass through glass merely
cracked; but the requirement is the admission of insects enough to make
an increase of flesh of 80 grains' weight, besides maintaining the waste
of the Toad during thirteen months. Where, in each case, was the
excrement corresponding to such an augmentation? An insect-diet, as
every naturalist knows, leaves a very considerable residuum of
indigestible, incorruptible, chitinous matter: the f{oe}cal remains of
an insect-diet sufficient to keep an adult Toad in condition for
thirteen months, and leave him 128 grains heavier than at first, would
form no inconsiderable or inconspicuous mass. Yet the silence of the
observer on so conclusive an evidence proves that it was utterly
wanting.
The Toads which survived longest were the largest specimens. Perhaps it
requires a condition of peculiar vigour to bear the incarceration. Even
these were all dead before two years had elapsed. But then it must be
remembered that they had been disturbed: they had been taken out,
handled, and weighed, and replaced; and during the second year they had
been examined "several times." Air, it is true, was not admitted in
these later examinations; but _light was_; and it may be that the
absence of all external stimulus (and light is a potent one) is
indispensable to the prolongation of vitality under conditions so
abnormal.
No one supposes that incarceration in solid rock is an ordinary event in
the life of even a Toad. However it occur,--granting that it may
occur,--it must surely be a rare accident happening to an individual
here and there, from which millions of Toads are exempt. We may
reasonably suppose, too, that not one in a hundred so accidentally
incarcerated would survive, the accident in the majority of cases
proving fatal. If we bear in mind these not unreasonable presumptions,
we shall not hastily decide that all the recorded discoveries of Toads
immured are proved false and impossible, because we have not succeeded
in finding a case of longevity out of four-and-twenty Toads, many of
them little ones, which we took and violently immured at our pleasure.
To my own mind these interesting experiments are far more corroborative
than contradictory of the popular belief. The amazing fact remains, that
an adult vertebrate air-breathing animal can certainly live, and
increase in size, shut up in a stone cell, debarred from light and air
and food, for a period between one and two years! What have we parallel
to this in the whole range of natural history? _C'est le premier pas qui
coute._ After the first year has passed so auspiciously, why may not a
second? a third? and so indefinitely--under circumstances peculiarly
favouring? It is by no means certain that there are not such favouring
circumstances, because we cannot precisely predicate what they are. And
if we admit the reported cases to be--only a few of them--true, we
cannot evade the conclusion, that the longevity of these imprisoned
Toads must be immense, incalculable. For a Toad that emerges when a
block of stone is split up, from a matrix that fits (say somewhat
roughly, if you please) its form and size, must have been there ever
since the stone was in a soft state, how long soever that may have
been. Nor does it in the least affect the question, that there may have
been some minute crack in the matrix through which insects, sufficient
to support life, entered. This circumstance, I say, if satisfactorily
proved, would not touch the question of time. And surely it is a marvel
of colossal magnitude that a vertebrate animal should have maintained
its life shut up in a mass of stone ever since the deposition of the
matter in a solid form, even though we be able to eliminate from it the
element of total abstinence during the entire period.