286 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE 
observation that the chicks drank “only after they had 
the taste of water by accident, or by imitating the old 
fowl.” Granted—but they also peck only after seeing 
small objects under certain conditions, and there is no 
instinct that does not require some stimulus in the 
environment to bring it into action. The mechanism 
is ready, but it is useless without this stimulus. 
If one knew but of those domestic chicks, or those 
jungle chicks, that peck only on seeing this act, one 
might speak of a certain imperfection in the instinct 
of pecking, as, if you will, in drinking; but what I 
must again object to, is drawing radically different 
conclusions as to the nature of eating and drinking 
by chicks, and even building theories of evolution on 
them. 
As I understand Prof. Cope is to reply to Prof. 
Baldwin’s views on “Consciousness and Evolution,” 
through the medium of the American Naturalist, I 
will only remark regarding his discussion in Science, 
p. 438, on “Heredity and Instinct,” that, while I find 
his views very interesting, as illustrations of natural 
selection, the Lamarckian principle, the influence of 
environment, etc., they seem, in the main, to fall within 
the range of principles already recognised by the Dar- 
winians and Lamarckians, though perhaps not ade- 
quately. But I fail to see that a single safe step can 
be taken in explaining evolution either in biology or 
psychology, if the effects of the environment and of 
use be ignored; indeed, Prof. Baldwin’s very facts and 
illustrations are, to my mind, only comprehensible by 
the introduction of those factors; and why there should 
be such anxiety on the part of many to get rid of 
factors so obvious, and to substitute for them the bio- 
logical fatalism and reasoning in a circle of Weismann, 
is a puzzle to me. 
