183 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY.— SUPPLEMENT. 



order in a pound of ordinary sbag tobacco, put a 

 modest pinch in his own mouth, and call in the 

 goat, who soon disposed of the remainder. It is 

 not on record that Billy suffered in his health or 

 displayed any marks of penitence after these per- 

 formances. 



Turn we next to dishonesty in the widest 

 sense of the word — the vice most in favor in this 

 virtuous age. The lower animals labor under the 

 disadvantage of having no stock-exchange and 

 of not using bills-of-exchange. But they indulge 

 to the best of their means and opportunities in 

 deceit, affectation, and hypocrisy. 



The Rev. J. G. Wood, in his recent interest- 

 ing work, " Man and Beast," gives an instance of 

 a terrier who, finding that a companion had anti- 

 cipated him in getting possession of a snug seat, 

 suddenly pricked up his ears, dashed into a cor- 

 ner of the room, and began scratching and bark- 

 ing furiously. The other dog, believing that this 

 commotion indicated the presence of a rat, hast- 

 ened to the spot, when the terrier at once ran 

 back and secured the coveted cushion. Mr. 

 Wood — we quote from memory — very justly 

 brings forward this incident as a proof of intel- 

 ligence in dogs. But it is equally a proof of dis- 

 honesty. It is a clear case of obtaining some- 

 thing desirable on false pretenses. 



Hypocrisy is almost as prominent among the 

 Felidce as among men. If a delicate morsel is 

 thrown to a cat, she will, except very hungry, 

 assume an air of utter unconcern. But all the 

 while she knows its position to a hair's-breadth, 

 and, when no one appears to be looking, it will 

 be at once seized and swallowed. Or, if a bowl 

 of cream is standing in an accessible position, 

 pussy appears lost in the brownest of studies. 

 Her eyes are closed, or, if open, are directed any- 

 where save toward the tempting object ; yet all 

 the time she is watching her opportunity. Wheth- 

 er in cats or in man this failing is invariably the 

 "homage which vice pays to virtue, 1 ' we leave an 

 open question. 



The following instance of deceit and hypoc- 

 risy in a terrier is given by Mr. G. J. Romanes, 

 in Nature (May 27, 1875, page GG) : 



" He used to be very fond of catching flies upon 

 the window-panes, and if ridiculed when unsuc- 

 cessful, was very much annoyed. On one occa- 

 sion, in order to see what he would do, I purposely 

 laughed immoderately every time he failed. It so 

 happened that he did so several times in succes- 

 sion — partly, I believe, in consequence of my 

 laughing— and eventually he became so distressed 

 that he positively pretended to catch the fly, going 

 through all the appropriate actions with his lips 



and tongue, and afterward rubbing the ground 

 with his neck, as if to kill the victim ; he then 

 looked up at me with a triumphant air of success. 

 So well was the whole process simulated, that I 

 should have been quite deceived had I not seen 

 that the fly was still upon the window. Accord- 

 ingly, I drew his attention to this fact, as well as 

 to the absence of anything upon the floor, and, 

 when he saw that his hypocrisy had been de- 

 tected, he slunk away under some furniture, evi- 

 dently much ashamed of himself." 



This last point is most significant, fully over- 

 turning the vulgar notion of the absence of moral 

 life in brutes, and of their total want of con- 

 science. 



That animals steal is a familiar expression. 

 But we must here distinguish two different cases : 

 we speak of hares stealing our corn, and of 

 blackbirds plundering our cherries; but in neither 

 case have we any reason to conclude that the 

 offenders can distinguish between the crops in 

 cultivated lands and the spontaneous produce of 

 woods and wastes. But not a few species, both 

 of birds, quadrupeds, and insects, evidently rec- 

 ognize the idea of property. This is proved by 

 the fact that they display far greater courage and 

 pertinacity in defense of their nests, their haunts, 

 and their accumulations, than under other circum- 

 stances. A dog that, when trespassing, is put to 

 flight by a gesture or a shout, becomes a formi- 

 dable opponent in his own yard. If, then, such 

 animals know what property is, and yet at times 

 make free with it, we may justly pronounce them 

 conscious thieves. Rooks are apt to purloin sticks 

 from each other's nests ; but, if the offender is, 

 detected and cuffed by the rightful owner, con- 

 science makes a coward of him, and he merely 

 defends himself by flight. More than this, rooks 

 have some rudiments of criminal law. Inveterate 

 thieves are sometimes banished from the rookery, 

 severely beaten, or even killed outright. 1 But 

 law presupposes the notions of right and wrong, 

 and could never, therefore, have arisen among 

 beings incapable of making this distinction. 



As another vice, we may take quarrelsomeness 

 —a terra which we need surely not define. This 

 attribute is highly conspicuous in the human 

 species, nowhere perhaps more strikingly than in 

 that part of the English nation who inhabit the 

 borders of Yorkshire and Lancashire. But cer- 

 tain dogs show the very same disposition, and, 

 without the smallest provocation, take every op- 



i A most interesting account of the habits of rooks 

 was given by Mr. Ashley, of Sheffield, in a lecture 

 delivered before the Mechanics' Institute of that town 

 about twenty years ago. 



