246 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



Turin ; and Professor Cornevin, of the veterinary school of Lyons, has 

 furnished me several valuable facts. 



By way of an historical introduction to our study, we will cast a 

 glance at the relations which the human laws of different societies 

 have established between men and animals. The primitive peoples, 

 fetichistic in their feelings and habits, and not yet capable of meta- 

 physical subtilties, instinctively put animals and men upon a footing 

 of perfect equality as respected the penalties to be attached to their 

 crimes. It was so with all people during the middle ages, and even 

 in fact down to the last century. Then, by one of the sudden contra- 

 dictions which frequently appear in the history of mankind, a distinc- 

 tion between the actions of men and of animals was clearly defined. 

 The powerful influence of Descartes, the encyclopedists, and the sci- 

 entific men of the last century, who were more frequently demolishers 

 than constructors, affords the explanation of the change, which, it is 

 proper to say, was due rather to bad than to generous sentiments. 

 Gradually, under the domination of the metaphysical spirit, the con- 

 viction arose that animals were brutes, that it was difficult to appreci- 

 ate their moral state, and that this moral state was after all separated, 

 if it had any existence, by an immense distance from that of man. So 

 the law protecting animals was quite forgotten in the framing of our 

 codes. 



Only a few scientific men or observers made approaches to the 

 admission of evolution and transformation. These ideas have become 

 common now, and nearly every one has adopted them theoretically, 

 but few admit them in practice, and it will not be surprising to us if 

 the title of our essay raises a smile on the face of many of its readers. 



We will begin by showing how the human societies that have pre- 

 ceded ours have manifested their feelings with regard to certain acts 

 of animals. Among fetich-worshiping peoples, the animal is consid- 

 ered as a man, and a member of the human family to the same extent 

 as a slave. Its loss is an occasion for mourning, and its trespasses 

 toward man deserve punishment. 



In ancient Egypt, when a cat died in the house, the inhabitants- 

 shaved their eyebrows ; if a dog died, they shaved their whole body. 

 In Athens, one of the laws of Triptolemus declared that no one had a 

 right to inflict a wrong upon a living creature. The Greeks were 

 aware of the tender and affectionate care which the young of the stork 

 exhibited for their old parents, and recorded that, when the latter lost 

 their feathers from age, the young stripped themselves of their down 

 for them and fed them with the food they collected. This was the 

 origin of the Greek law called " the law of the stork," by virtue of 

 which children were obligated to take care of their aged parents, and 

 those who refused to do so were declared infamous. How different is 

 it in our modern societies ! Pierquin remarks with reason that, as 

 man rises, he treats animals as if they were correspondingly degraded. 



