524 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY, 



hold of the chain was enough to make him disappear in the straw. 

 But he very soon learned by experience that the source of the detona- 

 tion was not in the chain but in the pistol, and could easily distinguish 

 it from the other appendages of the chain, of which he was not afraid 

 at all. Sitting on the straw in his cage, he would attentively watch 

 my movements while I was handling these appendages. The closer 

 my fingers approached the formidable object, the greater became his 

 anxiety, and with his eyes riveted upon the instrument and with tense 

 ears, he would dance continuously in the cage, all ready to go under 

 the straw. He would assure himself beforehand, for greater security, 

 that the cage-door was well shut ; and one day, when the bolt had not 

 been pushed in, he leaped out from the cage, which did not seem safe 

 enough for him, and went and hid himself under the bed in the next 

 room. As I gradually removed my hand from the pistol, I would 

 receive chuckles of approbation ; and, with his lips pushed forward and 

 the muscles of his ear moving by jerks, he would manifest a very great 

 joy. 



The conclusion is forced by these facts, that monkeys by experi- 

 ence become more prudent and more cunning. Carrying experiments 

 of this kind further, I have observed that the monkey can recognize 

 the object of its fear even in a picture, manifesting a faculty which 

 is largely wanting in little children and savages. I one day received 

 an armorer's illustrated catalogue. It had among other objects a 

 drawing of a revolver of the natural size, an arm which the rhesus 

 had never yet seen. I gave the catalogue to my pet, and he, after the 

 manner of many monkeys, began to turn the leaves. But, as soon as he 

 got to the picture of the revolver, he dropped the catalogue, groaned 

 lustily and made faces, and at once ran to hide himself in the straw, 

 which he would not leave till the pamphlet was taken away. 



The last fact proves the superiority of simian intelligence over that 

 of the other mammals. I disagree on this point from Perty, who says, 

 " A small number of animals, among which is the elephant, recognize 

 drawings of objects that are familiar to them." I must avow that my 

 investigations on this subject, upon the few elephants living in Europe, 

 have given me negative results. I do not know of any domestic ani- 

 mal that can distinguish a picture. It is useless to show dogs faithful 

 drawings of the dog, or of game ; the result is nearly always the same. 

 The animals will smell the paper, examining the substance, not the pict- 

 ure, and, once convinced there is nothing in it to exercise their teeth 

 upon, they resignedly abstain from any more profound investigation. 

 Monkeys, at least Old World monkeys, act differently. 



The rhesus, a baboon (Inuus ecaudatus)^ three Java monkeys {Ma- 

 cacus cynomolgus), and a sajou (Cebus hypoleucus) were drawn in 

 crayon for an illustrated magazine in pictures having a striking resem- 

 blance to the originals. I gave each monkey his portrait. The rhesus 

 and the Java monkeys recognized the pictures at once, and acted pre- 



