32 Darwin, and after Darwin. 



needless to add. this fact is fatal to Mr. Wallace's 

 argument as I understand it — viz. that the " faculties" 

 in question have been in some special manner com- 

 municated by some superior intelligence to man. 



Once more, it is obviously unfair to select such men as 

 a " Newton, a La Place, a Gauss, or a Cayley " for the 

 purpose of estimating the difference between savages 

 and civilized man in regard to the latter " faculty." 

 These men are the picked mathematicians of centuries. 

 Therefore they are men who not only enjoyed all 

 the highest possible benefits of individual culture, but 

 likewise those who have been most endowed with 

 mathematical power congenitally. So to speak, they 

 are the best variations in this particular direction 

 which our race is known to have produced. But 

 had such variations arisen among savages it is 

 sufficiently obvious that they could have come to 

 nothing. Therefore, it is the normal average of 

 " mathematical faculty " in civilized man that should 

 be contrasted with that of savage man ; and. when 

 due regard is paid to the all-important consideration 

 which immediately follows, I cannot feel that the 

 contrast presents any difficulty to the theory of human 

 evolution by natural causation. 



Lastly, the consideration just alluded to is, that 

 civilized man enjoys an advantage over saxage man 

 far in advance even of those which arise from a set- 

 tled state of society, incentives to intellectual training. 

 and so on. This inestimable advantage consists in 

 the art of writing, and the co7iseqnent transmission 



publications above referred to, this animal's instruction was continued, 

 and that, before her death, her "counting" extended as far as ten. 

 That is to say, any number of straws asked for from one to ten would 

 always be correctly yiven. 



