1875.] and the Lower Animals. 69 
these sounds consist chiefly of danger-signals, calls to food, 
or calls relative to sexual and parental instinéts, and that— 
few in number, vague and indefinite in chara¢cter—they 
make but a very faint approach to the character of a 
language. This may be here the case; but we have positive 
evidence that brutes are capable of connected thought—of 
trains of reasoning: this is generally allowed to involve, of 
necessity, the use of language, or of symbols of some kind 
answering the same purpose. Man, at all events, cannot 
think or reflect on any subject without the internal use of 
words. Coleridge, indeed, was of opinion that if language 
had never arisen, man might have come upon some method 
of conducting the reasoning process without its aid. But 
this view meets with little acceptance. This intimate con- 
nection of speech and reason is acknowledged in the idioms 
of several languages; but that language depends solely 
upon sourd, and must be addressed to the ear alone, is a 
false assumption. ‘The senses of sight and touch may each 
be the medium through which symbols of determinate 
meaning can be laid before the mind of an intelligent being. 
The language of ants, conveyed by varied touches with the 
antenne, has been observed by many naturalists,—we need 
only refer to Mr. Belt,—and is clearly adequate to the com- 
munication and transmission not of mere danger-signals 
and calls to food, but of precise and definite information 
concerning duties to be performed. A messenger ant can 
send a number of his companions to some precise spot, and 
can inform them beforehand what task they are to under- 
take, just as well as a human messenger in a manufactory 
or an aide-de-camp on a battle-field. Nor is the ant who 
has brought intelligence obliged to go first to the place 
where help is wanted; those whom he has first touched 
rush off in the proper direction, whilst he goes on collecting 
more forces. The case, then, stands thus:—Man is no 
longer able to deny that brutes think. If he will not admit 
that they think in words, or by means of equivalent sym- 
bols, he is, I submit, bound to show that they think in some 
different manner, or by the aid of some other instrument. 
There are on record authenticated instances proving that 
animals are capable of conveying or transmitting to each 
other, not mere general and vague intimations of good or 
evil, but pieces of distinét and specificinformation. Turning 
to beings which—morphologically at least—approach man 
much more nearly than the ants to which I have been re- 
ferring, we find the following :—‘“ A little Blenheim spaniel. 
of hers once accompanied her to the house of a relative, 
