HARBWICKE'S SCIENCE-GOSSIP. 



117 



of food, &c. These are also parts of our nature ; we 

 have not the privilege of folly even ; nor of language, 

 for animals certainly have some kind of language of 

 their own. I will however return to this point after- 

 wards. Even morals are but the rules of society 

 adopted by certain people, and are not everywhere 

 the same. But " le chien sait que pour ne pas etre 

 mordu il ne doit pas mordre, et agit en consequence ; 

 il a aussi sa morale" (Topinard). Now in the above 

 and similar cases, if our actions are supposed to result 

 from reason, why not those of animals ? The effects 

 in animals are much the same as in ourselves, why 

 not the causes ? If in similar actions in each case, 

 we adjudge reason to be exercised in ourselves, we 

 cannot, I think, consistently deny such power to 

 animals. Again, Mr. Barclay says that if we take 

 from man his reason, we leave him an idiot, but if we 

 take from the quadruped the modicum of reason 

 attributed to it, we leave it endowed with the same 

 intelligence, which we do not understand but call 

 instinct. Now memory cannot be called instinct. If 

 we take memory from man we certainly detract from 

 his intellect ; if we take it from animals do not we 

 lower their intellectual powers also ? Some savage 

 tribes have very little intellect ; there are some who 

 cannot count more than two, while a magpie- has 

 been known to count three. I do not mean merely 

 to repeat the numbers, but to understand them. 

 Monkeys will organise bands, appoint sentinels, 

 listen to speeches from their leaders for a very long 

 time, and have been found to execute, occasionally, 

 careless sentinels ; is there no reason about this ? It 

 is absolutely necessary to keep poetry, sentiment, &c. 

 out of such questions as this, and to reason merely 

 from known facts. It is often supposed that man 

 alone had reasoning power given to him, and it may 

 be very pleasing to our vanity to think so. The older 

 naturalists imagined that man and animals were 

 totally different, but has it not been shown that they 

 are really only different branches of the animal 

 creation ? Philology may throw some light on this 

 question. It is usually admitted by philologists that 

 man invented language. Now, beyond all doubt, 

 the earliest languages were very rudimentary and 

 imperfect, consisting of mere ejaculations. The great 

 reasoning power of men of the present time is in part 

 due to language, a medium in which to think. But 

 when language was so imperfect, thought must also 

 have been rudimentary. Now is it beyond prob- 

 ability that the first inventors of articulate speech had 

 not much more reasoning power than that shown by 

 apes ? Apes have the vocal organs of man, but have 

 not yet learned to use them as we have. Conse- 

 quently one of the greatest aids to thought is un- 

 developed in them. It has only arrived at its present 

 state of perfection in man during many thousands of 

 years. — A. Wlicatley. 



Intelligence in Animals. — When I was a young 

 man I lived in chambers on the ground floor of No. I, 

 King's Bench Walk. As the ante-room was dark, 

 glass had been let into the upper part of the front 

 door. This made it necessary to place the knocker 

 lower than is usual. A fine tom-cat was my constant 

 companion. As a knock at the door was a very 

 welcome sound to me, from the hope it excited of a 

 possible client, I was very prompt in answering the 

 summons, for I had not then a clerk. My cat had 

 thus the opportunity of observing (whether he did so 

 in fact is of course the question) that the opening of 

 the door immediately followed as a consequence on 

 the agitation of the knocker. Certain it is that torn 

 on returning from his nocturnal rambles would stand 

 on his hind legs and with his fore paws raise the 



knocker and produce as decided a succession of raps 

 as a human being could have given. I was generally 

 in bed when this occurred and was often unwilling to 

 get up to let the truant in. If I remained long 

 obdurate he would go round by Whitefriars (how he 

 left the Temple I do not know, as the high gates 

 were closed) and passing down a lane would climb 

 a wall into a garden. By this circuitous and difficult 

 route he obtained access to my bedroom window. 

 There he would make such a mewing and scratching 

 on the glass that I was compelled for peace' sake to 

 rise and admit him. I am afraid that I did not 

 always receive him with the welcome which his in- 

 telligence and perseverance deserved, but we were 

 soon good friends again, and it was with great regret 

 that I found on my return from a long vacation trip 

 that my cat had disappeared. It must be admitted 

 that the behaviour of the animal was as if he had 

 leasoned thus. " My master does not hear the knock- 

 ing because he is in bed ; I must therefore go round 

 and rouse him by making a noise at his window." 

 Some years ago I told this story to a very eminent 

 judge. With a twinkle in his eye he said, " I also 

 had a remarkable cat, she would sit on my table as I 

 read my briefs and play with the paper, and when my 

 eye approached the bottom of a page I could almost 

 fancy that she tried to turn it over for me with her 

 paw." This satire on my story and the inference I 

 was disposed to draw from it, has made me hesitate 

 to tell the anecdote except to a sympathising audience, 

 but as you are receiving contributions to the subject 

 of intelligence in animals, I think it due to the cats 

 to put it on record in your columns, as one for the 

 exact truth of which I am willing to be responsible ; 

 with this object I give my name. — James Hannen. 



Intelligence in the Dog. — I have read various 

 notes under the head of " Intelligence in Animals," 

 which have appeared in Science-Gossip, and am 

 induced to jot down a few particulars respecting a 

 sheep-dog of mine, leaving your readers to determine 

 the motive power that influences the animal, for I will 

 not offer an opinion as to whether instinct or reason 

 guides him. He is very fond of a long walk, and 

 when I first came to live here used to accompany me 

 to the post office, but the distance being trifling, he 

 soon refused to go with me whenever he saw any 

 letters or papers in my hand, and it is quite sufficient 

 now to say, ." I am going to the post," to prevent 

 his showing any desire to accompany me when I 

 leave the house. He goes every morning into the 

 lower end of the village with an elderly gentleman to 

 fetch the daily papers, and having discovered that a 

 young lady, a friend of mine, takes her morning's walk 

 about eleven ; he now returns from the village, 

 leaving Mr. B. at the stationer's in time to meet Miss 

 R., thus securing for himself two walks. He never 

 tries to accompany any of the family who are going 

 to church ; it is quite sufficient to say " Sunday," or 

 "church" (he was once turned out of church) ; but 

 if I am at home, and happen to go for a walk during 

 the hours of service, his delight is excessive. He barks 

 invariably as we pass the church. — I cannot break him 

 of the habit — as if to say to the others who are in 

 church : "I am going out, though you would not let 

 me come with you." He sleeps in an unused coach- 

 house, is fed once in twenty-four hours. When he is 

 locked-up for the night, all the larger bones which he 

 is unable to eat, he, after picking clean, carries off to a 

 corner of the building far away from his bed and lays 

 in a tidy heap. — Mrs. Alfred Watney. 



Pride of a Cow. — It is tolerably well known 

 that when milch cows kept on a farm are being 

 driven out to grass, and when brought home to milk, 



