CHAPTER XV

THE CAT QUESTION

The cat's unchangeable character--A check on the sparrows--Number

of sparrows in London--What becomes of the annual increase--No

natural check on the park sparrows--Cats in the parks--Story

of a cat at Battersea Park--Rabbits destroyed by cats in Hyde

Park--Number of cats in London--Ownerless cats--Their miserable

condition--How cats are made ownerless--How this evil may be

remedied--How to keep cats out of the parks.

As it will be necessary to show that, sooner or later, the cat question

will have to be dealt with in a manner not pleasant for the cats, it may

be well to say at once that I have no prejudice against this creature;

on the contrary, of all the lower animals that live with or near us

I admire him the most, because of his incorruptibility, his strict

adherence to the principle 'to thine own self be true.' He lives with

but not exactly in subjection to us. The coarser but more plastic dog we

can and we do in a sense unmake and remake. Not so with the cat, who

keeps to the terms of his ancient charter, in spite of all temptations

to allow of a few of the original lines being rubbed out and some new

ones written in their place. Old Æsop's celebrated apologue is as true

of to-day as of his own distant time; and thousands of years ago the

worshippers of Pasht who had tender hearts must have been scandalised at

their deity's way with a mouse. It would not, perhaps, be quite in order

to conclude this exordium without a reference to the poet's familiar

description of the cat as a 'harmless necessary' animal. The Elizabethan

was doubtless only thinking of rats and mice; in the London of to-day

the cat has another important use in keeping down the sparrows. But

for this check sparrows would quickly become an intolerable nuisance,

fluttering in crowds against our window-panes, crying incessantly for

crumbs, and distressing us with the spectacle of their semi-starved

condition.

Much has already been said of the sparrow in this work, but the lives of

cat and sparrow are so interlaced in London that in speaking of one it

becomes necessary to say something of the other. Let us try to get

a little nearer to the subject of the connection between these two

creatures. When we consider the extreme abundance of the sparrow in

all favourable situations and his general diffusion over the entire

metropolis; that he inhabits thousands of miles of streets, often many

scores of birds to the mile; and that besides all the birds that breed

in houses others nest in trees and bushes in every garden, square, park,

and other open space, we cannot suppose that there are less than a

million of these birds. One day in April, while walking rapidly the

length of one walk in a London park I counted 118 nests. There could not

have been fewer than 1,000 nests in the whole park. The entire sparrow

population of London may be as much as two or three millions, or even

more. Putting it as low as one million, the increase of half a million

pairs, breeding say four times a year, and rearing at least twelve young

(they often rear double that number), we have an annual increase of six

millions. Most of this increase goes to the cats; for the cat is the

sparrow's sole enemy, but a really dangerous one only when the bird is

just out of the nest; for the young bird very soon becomes strong of

wing and alert in mind, and is thereafter comparatively safe from the

slayer of his kind. The first instinct of the young urban sparrow, once

he has been coaxed by his parents or impelled by something in him to

use his wings, is to fly feebly, or rather to flutter downwards to the

earth; and there, under a bush in a back garden, or behind a pillar,

or in an angle of the wall, or in the area, the cat is waiting. The

inexperienced birdling, surprised and probably frightened at a new and

strange sensation, trying to balance himself and to come down softly,

touches the ground and is struck by sudden death. I have seen successive

broods from one nest come forth, and bird by bird at odd times flutter

down in this way, seeking a safer spot to rest upon than the sloping

roof and narrow ledges and cornices on the walls, and finally touch the

earth only to be instantly destroyed. But here one interesting question

arises. How, if the facts are as stated, it may be asked, does it happen

that the young sparrow so frequently makes this fatal mistake, in spite

of his inherited knowledge? I believe the explanation is that the

sparrow is essentially a tree bird, notwithstanding his acquired habit

of sitting contentedly on buildings in towns. A percher by nature, he is

yet able to rub along for most of the time without a perch; but we see

that even in districts where trees are few and far between the sparrows'

meeting-place or 'chapel' is invariably a tree. The young sparrow has

not yet acquired this convenient habit of the adults; he is a tree

sparrow, incapable of sitting quietly, like the young swallow or martin,

on a roof or ledge to be fed there by the parent birds. His perching

feet must lay hold of something; and when he cannot, so to speak, anchor

himself he is ill at ease, even on the wide surface of a flat roof, and

fidgets and hops this way and that, possibly experiencing a sensation as

of falling or of being thrown off his stand. It is to escape from this

unsuitable flat surface that he flutters or flies off and comes down.

This happens when no tree stands conveniently near; when there is a tree

beneath or close by the young sparrow makes for it instinctively, as a

duckling to water; and if he succeeds in reaching it he shows at once

that he has found relief, and is content to remain where he is. It is

most interesting to watch a brood of young sparrows just out of the

nest settling down on the topmost twigs of a tree, which they have been

lucky enough to reach, and remaining there for hours at a stretch,

dozing secure in the sun and wind, even when the wind is strong enough

to rock the tree, and only opening their eyes and rousing themselves at

intervals on the appearance of one of the parent birds with food in its

bill.

[Illustration: PARK SPARROWS]

In a large majority of cases the London sparrow has no tree growing

conveniently near to the breeding hole, and the consequence is that an

incredible number of broods are lost. The parent birds, when a whole

brood has thus been snapped up, after a day or two of excitement

cheerfully set to work relining the old nest with a few straws,

feathers, and hairs. From March to August, some to October, they are

occupied with this business, and I do not think that more than two

young birds survive out of every dozen of all the sparrows that breed

in houses; for with the park birds the case is different. As it is, the

birds that escape their subtle enemy are more than enough to make good

the annual losses from all other causes. In the streets, back-yards, and

gardens an ailing sparrow is, like the inexperienced young bird, quickly

snapped up. In the parks at all seasons, but particularly in winter,

ailing sparrows are not very rare; occasionally a dead one is seen.

The duck and the drake

Are there at his wake,

but the cat comes not in the daylight hours to bury him. When the young

park sparrows flutter down from their high nests there is no enemy lying

in wait: they get their proper exercise, and in short flights over the

turf learn the use of their wings; in the evening they go back to their

hollow tree or inaccessible nest. When they are asleep in their safe

cradles the cats come on the scene to hunt in the shrubberies, to

capture the thrush, blackbird, robin, dunnock, and wren, and in fact

any bird that nests in low bushes or on the ground. The noisy clang

of the closing park gates is a sound well known to the cats in the

neighbourhood; no sooner is it heard than they begin to issue from areas

and other places where they have been waiting, and in some spots as many

as half a dozen to a dozen may be counted in as many minutes crossing

the road and entering the park at one spot. They can go in anywhere,

but cats that are neighbours and personally known to one another often

have the habit of going in at one place. All night long they are at

their merry games; you may sometimes see them scampering over the turf

playing with one another like wild rabbits, and in the breeding season

they sup on many an incubating bird caught on its eggs, and on many a

nest full of fledglings. In the early morning they are back at their

houses, if they are not of the homeless ones, innocently washing their

faces in the breakfast room, waiting for the customary caress and saucer

of cream. But these luxuries do not alter the animal's nature: his

'fearful symmetry' was for all time, the sinews of his heart cannot be

twisted in any other way, and his brain is as it came from the furnace.

The following incident will serve to show the spirit that is in a London

cat. Some time ago it was discovered that a very big and a very black

one had established himself on an island in the lake at Battersea Park.

'Then he must have crossed over in a boat, as cats don't swim,' cried

the superintendent. On going to the place it was found that the cat

had killed and partly devoured one tufted duck and two sheldrakes. To

dispose of him a company of eighteen workmen and a good hunting dog were

sent over to the island. The cat, driven from his hiding-place in the

bushes, quickly ascended the tallest tree in his territory. A youth who

was a good climber went up after him, and the other men, armed with

stout sticks, gathered round the tree to receive the animal on his

coming down. The cat quickly made up his mind how to act: down he

swiftly came from branch to branch, and in less than two seconds was

frantically tearing about among the legs of his adversaries, and

bursting through the cordon was quickly in the water swimming for life.

Immediately there was a rush for the boats, but before the men could get

on to the water the cat had reached the shore and vanished in the thick

shrubbery. The men were then disposed in line like beaters and advanced,

but in the end the creature escaped from the park and was lost. This

animal deserves honourable mention on account of the splendid courage

and resource he displayed; but the injury he had caused and the

desperate and successful fight for life he made against such tremendous

odds show that cats ought not to be allowed in the parks. The loss of

the pair of sheldrakes is felt to be a serious one, and I agree that

when unpinioned the bird is very beautiful, and when it shows itself

flying over the ornamental waters of a park, I can admire it almost as

much as when seeing it on the coasts of Somerset or Northumberland. But

a blackcap, a nightingale, a kingfisher destroyed by cats in any park

would be as great or even a greater loss to London; and I may add that a

few days before writing this chapter, in the summer of 1897, the three

wild birds I have just named were to be seen at the very spot where the

sheldrakes were killed.

So far as I know, the park cats can only be credited with one good deed.

Two or three years ago a number of rabbits were introduced into Hyde

Park, and quickly began to increase and multiply, as rabbits will. For

a time the cats respected them, being unaccustomed to see such animals,

and possibly thinking that they would be dangerous to tackle. But

they soon found out that these strangers were the natural prey of a

carnivore, and, beginning with the little ones, then going on to those

that were grown up, eventually devoured them all. Two big old buck

rabbits survived the others for a couple of months, but even these were

finally conquered and eaten. I for one am very glad at the result, for

it really seemed too ridiculous that our great national park should be

turned into a rabbit warren as well as a duck-breeding establishment.

The extraordinary rapidity with which the rabbits were destroyed will

serve to give some idea of the numbers and destructiveness of the cats

that nightly make the open spaces of London their hunting grounds. How

many cats are there in London? Not a word that I am aware of has been

written on the subject, and as there is no tax on them there is no

possibility of finding out the exact truth. Nevertheless, in an indirect

way we may be able to get a proximate idea of their numbers.

The number of dogs in London is supposed to be about two hundred

thousand; no doubt it is really greater, since many dogs escape the

tax. Cats in London are very much more numerous than dogs. Thus, in

the streets I know best, in the part of London where I live, there are

about eight cats to every dog; in some streets there are ten or twelve,

in others not more than six. If a census could be taken it would

probably show that the entire cat population does not fall short of

three-quarters of a million; but I may be wide of the mark in this

estimate, and should prefer at present to say that there are certainly

not less than half a million cats in London. Even this may seem an

astonishing number, since it is not usual for any house to have more

than one, and in a good many houses not one is kept. On the other hand

there is a vast population of ownerless cats. These cannot well be

called homeless since they all attach themselves to some house, which

they make their home, and to which they return as regularly as any wild

beast to its den or lair. Judging solely from my own observation, I

do not think that there can be less than from eighty thousand to one

hundred thousand of these ownerless cats in the metropolis. Let me take

the case of the house I live in. No cat is kept, yet from year's end to

year's end there are seldom less than three cats to make use of it, or

to make it their home. At all hours of the day they are to be seen in

the area, or on the doorsteps, or somewhere near; and at odd times they

go into the basement rooms--they get in at the windows, or at any door

that happens to be left open, and if not discovered spend the night in

the house. There are scores of houses in my immediate neighbourhood

which have no smell of valerian about them and are favoured in the same

way.

It is not possible at all times of the year to distinguish these

ownerless or stray cats from those that have owners; but there are

seasons of scarcity for the outdoor animals during which they differ in

appearance from the others; and at such times, with some practice, one

may get an idea of the number of strays in his own neighbourhood. It is

in the winter, during long and severe frosts, that the ownerless ones

suffer most, and on a bright day in a walk of a quarter of a mile you

will sometimes see as many as a dozen of these poor wretches sunning

themselves on one side of the street. On coming close to one of these

cats he invariably looks at you with wide-open startled eyes, and so

long as you stand quietly regarding him he will keep this look. The

moment you speak kindly to him the alarm vanishes from his eyes, he

knows you for a friend, and is as ready as any starving human beggar

to tell you his miserable story. He mews piteously; but sometimes when

his mouth opens no sound issues from it--he is too feeble even to mew.

His fur has a harsher appearance than in other cats, the hairs stand

up like the puffed-out feathers of an owl, and hide his body's

excessive leanness; but when you lift him up you are astonished at his

lightness--he is like a wisp of straw in your hand. The marvel is that

when he has got to this pass he can still keep alive from day to day;

for in the bleak streets there is no food for him, and the people of the

houses he hangs about have hardened their hearts against him on account

of his thieving, or because if they give him an occasional scrap of food

he will never go away, and their only wish is to see the last of him.

Many of these stray cats get most of their food in dust-bins, into which

they slink whenever the door is left open for a few minutes. They find a

few scraps to keep them alive, and at rare intervals capture a mouse.

Sometimes they jump out when ashes are shot into their hiding-place; but

the cat who has got hardened merely shuts his eyes against the stinging

cloud, crouching in his corner, and is satisfied to remain for days

shut up in his dreary cell, finding it more tolerable than the wintry

streets and inhospitable areas. It is related of La Fontaine, the

fabulist, that he was passionately fond of strawberries, on account of

the effect which this fruit had in annually restoring him to comparative

health and some pleasure in life; and that during the winter and spring

his only wish was that the strawberry season when it came round again

would find him still living, since if it delayed its coming he would

lose all hope. In like manner these ownerless cats, if they have any

thought about their condition, must long for the change in the year that

will once more call forth the black-beetles in areas and basements, and

bring the young sparrows fluttering down from their inaccessible nests.

How does it happen that there are so many of these strays in London?

For cats do not leave their homes of their own accord, except in rare

instances when they have been enticed or encouraged to take up their

quarters in some other neighbourhood. As a rule the animal prefers its

own home with poverty to abundance in a strange place. I believe that a

vast majority of these poor ones come from the houses or rooms inhabited

by the poor. Most persons are extremely reluctant to put kittens that

are not wanted to death. In the houses of the well-to-do the servants

are ordered to kill them; but the poor have no person to delegate the

dirty work to; and they have, moreover, a kindlier feeling for their

pet animals, owing to the fact that they live more with them in their

confined homes than is the case with the prosperous. The consequence is

that in very many cases not one of a litter is killed; they are mostly

given away to friends, and their friends' children are delighted to have

them as pets. The kitten amuses a child immensely with its playful ways,

and is loved for its pretty blue eyes full of fun and mischief and

wonder at everything. But when it grows up the charm vanishes, and it is

found that the cat is in the way; he is often on the common staircase

where there are perhaps other cats, and eventually he becomes a

nuisance. The poor are also often moving, and are not well able to take

their pet from place to place. It is decided to get rid of the cat, but

they do not kill it, nor would they like to see it killed by another;

it must be 'strayed'--that is to say, placed in a sack, taken for some

miles away from home at night and released in a strange place.

Now this very painful condition of things ought not to continue, and my

only reason for going into the subject is to suggest a remedy. This is

that the metropolitan police be instructed to remove all stray cats and

send them to a lethal chamber provided for the purpose. The ownerless

cats, we have seen, do not roam about the town, but have a home, or at

all events a house, to which they attach themselves, and which they

refuse to leave, however inhospitably or even cruelly they may be

treated. On making some inquiries at houses in my own neighbourhood on

the subject, I find that most people are anxious to get rid of the stray

cats they may happen to have about the place, but are at a loss to know

how to do it. In some instances they succeed in straying them again, but

the cats are no better off than before, and the starving population is

not diminished. But it would be a simple way out of the difficulty if

they could have them removed by reporting them to the nearest policeman.

We have seen, as a result of the muzzling order imposed by the County

Council, that upwards of forty thousand unclaimed dogs have been

destroyed in the course of a year (1896), and the presumption is that

these dogs were little valued and not properly cared for by their

owners. The harvest of stray cats would probably not be less than sixty

or seventy thousand for the first year.

To return to the parks. The question is how to exclude the hunting cats

that frequent them at night. I have conversed with perhaps a hundred

superintendents, inspectors, and keepers on the subject, and invariably

they say that it is impossible to exclude the cats, or that they do not

see how it is to be done. And yet in many parks they are always trying

to do it; they hunt them at night with dogs, they shoot them with rook

rifles, and they poison them: but all these measures produce no effect,

and are, moreover, employed with secrecy and with fear lest the

paragraph writer and public should find out, and an outcry be made.

It is plain that the cats can only be kept out by means of a suitable

fence, or net, or screen of wire. Rabbit wire netting is hardly

suitable, as it is unsightly and is not an efficient protection. The

most effectual form would be a plain wire fence in squares, the cross

wires tied to the uprights with wire thread, the top of the fence made

to curve outwards to prevent the animals from climbing over it. This

screen could be placed inside of the park railings at a distance of

about three or four feet from them. A fence or screen of this pattern

has a handsome appearance, but it is expensive, the cost being about

fourpence to fivepence the square foot. Probably some other cheaper and

equally effective wire protection could be designed. I have consulted

some of the large dealers in wire netting and fencing of all kinds, and

they tell me that a fence to keep out cats from parks has yet to be

invented. Very likely; at the same time there are probably very many

ingenious persons in England who would quickly invent what is wanted

if it was made worth their while. It simply comes to this: if the

park authorities really wish to keep out the cats they can do so at a

moderate cost, and it is not likely that even their worst critics would

venture to blame them for spending a few hundreds for such an object.

We must look to the County Council to take the lead in this matter. It

is my conviction--there is much even now going on in some of the parks

to show how well founded it is--that once the chief destroyer of our

valuable birds is excluded, a great and rapid improvement in the

character of our bird population will ensue. The number of the species

we value most would be relatively larger. The change for the better

would come about without any direct encouragement and protection being

given; at the same time it would be an immense help if those who are in

charge of open spaces could be brought to see that wild bird life is

very much more to the people of London than all the pleasant and pretty

things in the way of bands of music, exotic flowers, and brick and stone

and metal ornaments, which they are providing at a very considerable

cost.

[Illustration: STARLING AT HOME]

Birds in London · 第 15 / 16 章