CONCLUSION. 105 
to their individual opportunities of procuring sub- 
stances differing in some degree from those used in 
other situations by the same species. These adapta- 
tions only show that the instinct which guides them 
to the construction of the nest best fitted to their hab- 
its is not a blind one; that it is very nearly allied to the 
reasoning faculty, if it is not identified withit. But 
that the rule by which birds conduct their architec- 
tural labours is exceedingly limited, must be evident 
from the consideration that no species whatever is 
in a state of progression from a rude to a polished 
style of construction. ‘Thereis nearly as much dif- 
ference between the comparative beauty of the nests 
of a wood-pigeon and of a bottle-tit, as between the 
hut of a North American savage and a Grecian tem- 
ple. But although the savage, in the course of ages, 
may attain as much civilization as would lead him 
to the construction of a new Parthenon, the wood- 
pigeon will continue only to make a platform of 
sticks to the end of time. It is evident, from a con- 
templation of all nature, that the faculties of quad- 
rupeds, birds, insects, and all the inferior animals, 
are stationary: those of man only are progressive. 
It is this distinction which enables him, agreeably 
to the will of his Creator, to “ have dominion over 
the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and 
over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every 
creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” But 
within their limited range the inferior animals per- 
form their proper labours with an unwearied indus- 
try and an unering precision, which call forth our 
wonder and admiration. Of these remarkable qual- 
ities we have given abundant examples in the pre- 
ceding pages ; and they are not without moral in- 
struction. Elevated as our minds are in the com- 
parative scale of nature, we may still take example 
from the diligence, the perseverance, and the cheer- 
fulness which preside over the Architecture of Birds. 
