110 MAN [CHAP. VIII 



Letter 477 To A. R. Wallace. 



Down, Jan. loth [1873]. 



I have read your Review with much interest, and I thank 

 you sincerely for the very kind spirit in which it is written. 

 I cannot say that I am convinced by your criticisms. 1 If 

 you have ever actually observed a kitten sucking and 

 pounding, with extended toes, its mother, and then seen the 

 same kitten when a little older doing the same thing on a soft 

 shawl, and ultimately an old cat (as I have seen), and do not 

 admit that it is identically the same action, I am astonished. 

 With respect to the decapitated frog, 2 I have always heard of 

 Pfiiiger as a most trustworthy observer. If, indeed, any one 

 knows a frog's habits so well as to say that it never rubs off 

 a bit of leaf or other object which may stick to its thigh, in 

 the same manner as it did the acid, your objection would be 

 valid. Some of Flourens' experiments, in which he removed 

 the cerebral hemispheres from a pigeon, indicate that acts 

 apparently performed consciously can be done without con- 

 sciousness. I presume through the force of habit, in which 

 case it would appear that intellectual power is not brought 

 into play. Several persons have made suggestions and 

 objections as yours about the hands 3 being held up in 

 astonishment ; if there was any straining of the muscles, as 

 with protruded arms under fright, I would agree ; as it is I 



1 Quarterly Journal of Science, Jan., 1873, p. 116: "I can hardly 

 believe that when a cat, lying on a shawl or other soft material, pats or 

 pounds it with its feet, or sometimes sucks a piece of it, it is the persist- 

 ence of the habit of pressing the mammary glands and sucking during 

 kittenhood." Mr. Wallace goes on to say that infantine habits are 

 generally completely lost in adult life, and that it seems unlikely that 

 they should persist in a few isolated instances. 



2 Mr. Wallace speaks of " a readiness to accept the most marvellous 

 conclusions or interpretations of physiologists on what seem very insuffi- 

 cient grounds," and he goes on to assert that the frog experiment is 

 either incorrectly recorded or else that it " demonstrates volition, and 

 not reflex action." 



3 The raising of the hands in surprise is explained {Expression of 

 Emotions, Ed. I., p. 287) on the doctrine of antithesis as being the 

 opposite of listlessness. Mr. Wallace's view (given in the 2nd edit, of 

 Expression of the Emotions, p. 300) is that the gesture is appropriate to 

 sudden defence or to the giving of aid to another person. 



