196 



NATURE 



\yune 26, 1879 



mon, which could be readily explained by auy one possessing a 

 little elementary knowledge of science. 



P. Herbert Carpenter 

 The Museum, Eton College, June 21 



Intellect in Brutes 



In Nature, vol. xx. p. 147, Mr. H. D. Barclay writes : — 

 " The fact that a cat or a dog subject their food to examination 

 before eatmg it, does not, most assuredly, prove the possession 

 of abstract powers of thought in the animal. Mr. Romanes 

 here says : — ' The motive of the examination being to ascertain 

 which general idea of quality is appropriate to the particular 

 object examined.' 



" Here he attributes to an animal whose nature he does not 

 fully understand, his own process of thought, and this appears to 

 me to be a constant source of en'or in the investigation of animal 

 psychology. That brutes possess self-consciousness, introspec- 

 tion, imagination, abstract thought, cannot, I think, be proved. 

 The fact that animals possess faculties differing from those of 

 man is an insuperable obstacle to a perfect analysis of their 

 intelligences. 



"Name these faculties as you please, call them 'inherited 

 habit,' 'inherited memory,' it is perfectly certain that man does 

 not possess them." 



Now, far from it being "perfectly certain" that animals 

 possess mental facnlties differing in kind from our own, it seems 

 to me that, if we excejat the so-called "homing instinct "as a 

 faculty about which as yet we know veiy little, it is " perfectly 

 certain " that there is no other faculty presented by brutes which 

 is not also presented by man. It is the converse proposition that 

 is more difficult to combat— viz., that man possesses faculties of 

 mind which appear at first sight to differ in kind from anything 

 that is presented by animals. Therefore, while I should deem 

 It almost superfluous to "prove" that man possesses "in- 

 stincts " or "inherited habits" in common with animals, I have 

 never attempted to "prove" that animals possess "self-con- 

 sciousness " or " introspection " in common with man. Indeed, 

 if Mr. Barclay will again read my article in Nature, he will see 

 that I expressly state my belief that these, the highest faculties of 

 mind, may be, as the theory of evolution would lead us to expect 

 they ought to be, confined to the liighest product of psychological 

 development. 



As regards the illustration to which Mr. Barclay objects, I 

 may observe that I selected it for the express purpose cf dis- 

 armmg the criticism which he advances. Had I chosen for an 

 illustration some "general idea of quality" more abstract than 

 that of "good for eating or bad for eating," I could better have 

 understood a critic accusing me of attributing to animals my 

 " own process of thought" in the regions of self-conscious in- 

 trospection. But seeing that I do not myself require or perform 

 any process of introspective thought in order to reject a rotten 

 egg or to regale myself on good roast beef, I cannot understand 

 why I should not attribute to an animal precisely the same 

 general ideas of "good for eating and bad for eating" that in 

 my own case I know to be the causes of my actiu" precisely 

 as I see animals act. The truth is that in speaking of general 

 or abstract ideas we are not careful enough to discriminate 

 between those simple ideas of quality which spring from mere 

 sensuous associations, and those more elaborated ideas which 

 spring from tlie more complex associations that are supplied 

 by "mental reflection." But although it is of importance to 

 remember that there is tlius a great distinction between these two 

 orders of abstract ideas, it is of no less importance to remember 

 tiat both orders belong to the same class— all such ideas havino- 

 reference to quality as abstracted from particular objects of per° 

 ception, and the only difference between those of the one order 

 and those of the other consistuig in the higher degree of elabora- 

 tion which is sui)plied to our abstractions by the power of think- 

 ing about our thoughts. On the whole, therefore, I maintam 

 that itfa?jbe "proved" that animals " possess abstract thought " 

 of the inferior order which I have explained, and the phenomena 

 of dreaming which is presented by several animals would seem 

 sufficient proof that some animals, at least, possess a tolerably 

 well-developed "imagination." George J. Romanes 



I HAVE been reading with great interest the letters and dis- 

 cussions lately published in Nature, on intellect in brutes. 

 riowever, ui none of them have I found any notice of a dog 



recognising a painted likeness of his master or any member of 

 the family. I have seen, in other publications on this subject, 

 that " this is one of the things a dog has never been known to 

 do." During my residence in Cornwall I had a most inteUigent 

 and faithful dog for fifteen years. I had him when a month 

 old. His mother was a beautiful liver-coloured spaniel, rather 

 large ; his father a black Newfoundland ; my dog took after 

 him in colour and shape. 



In 1 843 a young and self-taught artist asked me to allow him to 

 paint my likeness in oil colours, and I consented. His studio was 

 in the next town, three miles distant, and as often as required I 

 went over ; I, however, did not take my dog with me. It was 

 done in Kit-cat size ; and he succeeded so well in the likeness 

 and artistic work, that when exhibited at the annual meeting of 

 the Polytechnic Society at Falmouth, a medal %\as awarded 

 to it, and, as well, it was " highly commended." Not only this, it 

 brought him into notice and gained him lots of employment. The 

 artist was so grateful for my attention that he presented me with 

 the painting, and I still have it. When it was brought to my 

 house, my old dog was present with the family at the " unveiling ; " 

 nothing was said to him nor invitation given him to notice it. 

 We saw that his gaze was steadily fixed on it, and he soon 

 became excited, and whined, and tried to lick and scratch it, and 

 was so much taken up with it that we — although so well knowing 

 his intelligence — were all quite surprised; in fact, could 

 scarcely believe that he should know it was my likeness. We, 

 however, had sufficient proof after it was hung up in our parlour ; 

 the room was rather low, and under the picture stood a chair; 

 the door was left open without any thought about the dog ; he, 

 however, soon found it out, when a low whining and scratching 

 was heard by the family, and on search being made, he was in 

 the chair trying to get at the picture. After this I put it up 

 higher, so as to prevent it being injured by him. This did not 

 prevent him from paying attention to it, for whenever I was 

 away from home, whether for a short or long time — sometimes 

 for several days — he spent most of his time gazing on it, and as it 

 appeared to give him comfort the door was always left open for 

 him. When I was long away he made a low whining, as if to 

 draw attention to it. This lasted for years, in fact as long as he 

 lived, and was able to see it. I have never kept a dog since he died, 

 I dare not — his loss so much affected me. I might tell of many 

 of his wonderful actions ; he could do most of such things as are 

 related of other dogs. I am now only anxious to notice this 

 recognition of my likeness, from never having heard of another 

 such fact being recorded of any other dog. 

 Edinburgh Chas W. Peach 



A case somewhat similar to that mentioned by Dr. Frost, of 

 a cat scattering crumbs, occurred here within my own know- 

 ledge. 



During the recent severe winter a friend was in the habit of 

 throwing crumbs for birds outside his bedroom window. The 

 family have a fine black cat, which, seeing that the crumbs 

 brought birds, would occasionally hide herself behind some 

 shrubs, and when the birds came for their breakfast, would pounce 

 out upon them with varying success. The crumbs had been 

 laid out as usual, one afternoon, but left untouched, and during 

 the night a slight fall of snow occurred. On looking out next 

 morning my friend observed Puss busily engaged scratching 

 aw ay the snow. Curious to learn what she sought, he waited, 

 and .saw her take the crumbs up from the cleared space and lay 

 them one after another on the snow. After doing this she re- 

 tired behind the shrubs to wait further developments. This was 

 repeated on two other occasions, until finally they were obliged 

 to give up putting out crumbs, as Puss showed herself such a 

 fatal enemy to the bii-ds. GREENOCK 



June 23 



Aquarium Notes 



Marine Cofejioda — The luiiip-siicker. — In the salt water tanks 

 of the Edinburgh Aquarium at the present date may be seen an 

 immense number of white specks flitting rapidly through the 

 water, after the fashion of the familiar Cyclops and its neigh- 

 bours in fresh streams. On subjecting these "tenants at will" 

 of the tanks to microscopic scrutiny, they are seen to belong to 

 the Entomostracous division of ihe Crustacea, and may in all 

 probability be classified in the cyclops-family, as near kith and 

 kin of the well-known " fresh-water flea." The cephalothorax 



