THE IDEA OF MURDER IN ANIMALS. 809 



victory absolutely diabolical." Here, too, it is evident that even 

 the strongest baboon is not guided by the idea of destroying 

 its adversary ; it is not aware that by compressing the dog's throat 

 it might strangle or suffocate him, that by biting in certain parts 

 of the body it might cause him to bleed to death. It simply allows 

 itself to be carried away by an impulse of fury, which is vented 

 in bites and scratches sometimes, it is true, of terrific violence 

 which, however, do not easily cause death, precisely because all 

 these actions, however violent, are not co-ordinated in an end, 

 viz., that of killing the adversary by a clear idea of death and of 

 the means of inflicting it. 



I have cited the above examples to show that in one of the 

 strongest felines and among the strongest and most intelligent of 

 the anthropoid apes the existence of the idea of death and of the 

 means of inflicting it can not be admitted, and that hence the 

 slaughter of one of these animals by another, whether of its own 

 or of another species, can never be the result of a conscious act of 

 volition. In their struggles, both among themselves and with 

 other creatures, their aim is never to kill, but merely to bite and 

 claw ; in short, to give vent to their internal rage by violent acts 

 as impulse may direct. And if such acts do sometimes result in 

 death, this fact must be regarded as essentially due to accident, 

 and according as the wound happens to be inflicted, with more or 

 less severity, upon a vital part of the body. But the capacity, 

 predetermined by conscious will, to slay another creature of the 

 same or of a different species seems to be non-existent ; and hence 

 all the ferocity of these animals is impulsive, the result of im- 

 petus, never a matter of reflection or of will ; it is confined be- 

 tween narrow limits, in that it lacks that idea of the possibility 

 of destroying the life of other creatures which has opened such a 

 boundless horizon to the ferocity of the human race. 



Can this generalization, which facts demonstrate to be true as 

 regards the lion and some of the primates, be extended to the whole 

 animal creation ? To make a similar assertion would undoubtedly 

 be rash ; the facts which have been noted are not numerous, and 

 we know little or nothing of the psychology of ferocity even 

 among animals like the tiger, which have, as wild beasts, a ter- 

 rible reputation, or among others which are extraordinarily intel- 

 ligent, such as the elephant. Nevertheless I believe that, as we 

 have been able to observe this fact in one of the most feared of 

 carnivora and also among the most intelligent and those nearest 

 to man, we are justified in asserting that the idea of death and 

 the possibility of inflicting it by artificial means in the animal 

 world is at least very indistinct, scarcely dawning, uncertain, and 

 that if any species has arrived at such an idea, it is in such cases 

 a mere dim and blurred outline. 



