COMPARATIVE PSYCHOLOGY ao 
followed, and should continue to pursue, than as state- 
ments of established results. Naturally, most of our 
studies, though by no means all, have been of the domestic 
animals, and, as was to be expected, the dog is the 
creature whose mental nature has been most frequently 
the subject of our enquiries—and this will likely be the 
case in the future, also, for many reasons; or if we can 
establish some conclusions regarding the psychic opera- 
tions and development of any one of the lower animals, 
we then have more certain ground for comparison, even 
if we never succeed in showing that we have any war- 
rant for interpreting the mental operations of inferior 
animals in terms of thoseof man. If we could establish 
a relative scale of intelligence for animals below man, 
much would have been accomplished. The first com- 
munication laid before the Society grew out of a paper 
read before the Veterinary Association by Principal 
M‘Eachran. In this communication the behaviour of a 
dog that was manifestly possessed of unusual intelli- 
gence was described in detail, Among other evidences 
of this were his journeys to a baker’s shop to purchase 
food for himself. Several such cases are on record, and 
as I shall have occasion to bring this matter before you 
again shortly, it will not be dwelt upon now. In allsuch 
cases we cannot be too cautious in the explanations we 
adopt. Mr Dawes, at the same meeting, sketched the 
history of a Cocker Spaniel that, in consequence of early 
training, would, on request, fetch any one of six different 
articles. 
This case led to the important enquiry: In how far, 
or in what sense, do animals understand words? In the 
course of the discussion following, it was pointed out 
that dogs would answer to their names when uttered 
by strangers, in opposition to the view that the animal 
was guided chiefly, if not solely, by the general de- 
meanour of the person calling the dog, the tone of voice, 
C 
