248 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



In 1120 the Bishop of Laon issued a letter of excommunication 

 against the caterpillars and the field-mice. Under Francis I an official 

 advocate was provided for these animals, and pleadings were allowed 

 between them and the farmers. In 1356, at Falaise, a sow having 

 killed a child and begun to devour it, the judge condemned it to per- 

 ish by the sword. As it had eaten an arm and part of the head of 

 the child, one of its feet was cut off and its " face " was mutilated. 

 Then it was dressed in man's clothes before being led to punishment, 

 and the executioner received his customary fee of ten sous and a pair 

 of gloves. In 1543 the consuls and aldermen of Grenoble published a 

 decree demanding the excommunication of the snails and caterpillars. 

 In 1585 the Grand Vicar of Valencia ordered the caterpillars, with 

 which the country was infested, to evacuate his diocese. In 1587 an 

 action was brought against the insects which were ravaging a field 

 near Saint Jean de Maurienne, and they were condemned. Jean Milon, 

 an officer of Troyes, pronounced the following sentence on the 9th of 

 July, 151G : " Having heard the parties, and granting the request of 

 the inhabitants of Villenove, we admonish the caterpillars to retire 

 within six days ; and, in case they do not comply, we pronounce them 

 accursed and excommunicated." 



M. Benoist Saint-Prix has collected eighty sentences of death and ex- 

 communications that were pronounced between 1120 and 1741 against 

 every species of animals, from the ass to the grasshopper. He adds 

 that, while in some countries animals have been employed as execu- 

 tioners, they have frequently been admitted in France as witnesses in 

 suits. Who does not remember the history of the dog of Montargis, 

 and the duel that Charles V ordered to be fought between the faithful 

 animal of Aubrey of Montdidier and the assassin of his master, Rich- 

 ard Macaire ? 



The recital of these facts and a comparison of what has taken place 

 in our time permit us to appreciate the great modifications that have 

 been produced in the feelings of mankind. We have furthermore 

 learned that, until our epoch, an erroneous idea prevailed regarding 

 the offenses or crimes committed by animals. The actions of animals 

 toward other animals had passed almost unperceived, and did not seem 

 worthy of being noticed. It could not, therefore, enter the head of 

 any person to investigate their moral bearing. The animal was ad- 

 judged and punished only when his offense bore upon man or society. 



It appears to us that the time has come for a scientific study of cer- 

 tain criminal acts of animals, for the purpose of comparing them with 

 similar acts committed by men and punishable by our laws. It is a 

 study in comparative criminal psychology. We believe that such a 

 work may have a higher bearing than that of a mere effort of scientific 

 curiosity ; and it seems to us, with Georges Leroy, that the moral con- 

 dition of wolves may throw light upon that of men. 



According to Georges Leroy, three motives influence the animal 



