The Scottish Naturalist. 95 



attention which has been rewarded by there being found, it is 

 thought, ample reason for maintaining that there is no essential 

 difference between the two orders of souls. The popular 

 opinion that there is such a difference is now little more than a 

 superstition, Mr. D. Spalding tells us, though perhaps too 

 sanguinely. Continuity is thus preserved. 



Whatever may be thought of the right of this view to perma- 

 nence as a true or exhaustive interpretation of the facts, there is 

 this hopeful feature in the matter, that it is the real character 

 of the facts of the case, the psychical actions, so called, of 

 animals that is being made the subject of investigation. There 

 has been often theorising on the essential nature of the psychi- 

 cal principle in them, which was mere working in the dark so 

 long as the facts — i.e., the actions — were not made the foundation 

 of inference. If ever we are to determine the true nature of 

 the moving principle in the brute, it can only be after we have 

 detected the real nature of the movements which it is capable 

 of causing. The true nature of the effects may be expected to 

 indicate the true nature of the cause. 



The wide general view, that the animal and human souls are 

 identical, phenomenally and substantially, is consistent with 

 various, and indeed conflicting subordinate opinions. It is 

 the general ground of two such opposing views as the fol- 

 lowing. First, in the words of Mr. Huxley — "The actions 

 of animals are the result of their physical organisation. 

 . . . . They are machines, one part of which (the ner- 

 vous system) not only sets the rest in motion and co-ordi- 

 nates its movements in relation with changes in surrounding 

 bodies, but is provided with special apparatus, the function 

 of which is calling into existence these states of conscious- 

 ness which are termed sensations, emotions, and ideas ; " 

 as to which states of consciousness he adds, "there is no 

 evidence that it is they that cause these molecular changes 

 which give rise to muscular motion." (F. Rev., No. 132 p. 

 574-5.) So that this view, which Mr. Huxley also extends to man, 

 is exactly as Mr. D. Spalding (in Nat. 10, 520) has described it. 

 " Not only the reflex action of animals, but also all the con- 

 scious, so-called voluntary actions of men — those, viz., that we 

 perform for the first time, and, as we say, with a conscious end 

 in view, are purely automatic ; that is, that consciousness, while 

 it accompanies the workings of the animal machine never stands 

 in a causal relation to any movements whatever ; that no move- 



