INTROJPUCrORY. 25 



Mr. Romanes's judgment is, however, seriously imperilled 

 by a perfectly amazing assertion he makes in a note 

 on this subject. He there tells us, * " The dictum of 

 Aristotle and Buffon, that animals differ from man in 

 having no power of mental apprehension, may be dis- 

 regarded ; for it appears to be sufficiently disposed of by 

 the following remark of Bureau de la Malle : * Si les 

 animaux n'etaient pas susceptibles d'apprendre les mo- 

 yens de se conserver, les especes se seraient aneanties.' " 



So, then, animals have first to learn how to live, and 

 then go on living afterwards ! The sucking action of 

 the new-born infant, the grain pecking of the freshly- 

 hatched chick, and the nutritious properties of the leaves 

 whereon any insect's eggs may be laid, must all be 

 learnt before the creature's impulses are turned to 

 practical account ! 



This statement could never have been written but 

 for the flagrant ambiguity of the term " to learn " made 

 use of in it. That such a sentence should ever have 

 been written by De la Malle is wonderful, but that it 

 should be quoted nowadays by Mr. Romanes, and sup- 

 posed by him to overpower the assertions of Aristotle 

 and Buffon, is astounding. It is difficult to imagine 

 how such an intelligent and painstaking author as Mr. 

 Romanes could fall into such a bathos. We shall see, 

 however, shortly that he is led by a correspondent's 

 cockatoo to step over the edge of an abyss of absurdity 

 even more profound.f 



But though the zeal with which our author endea- 

 vours to establish his thesis thus causes him every now 

 * p. 12. t See below, chapter iii. 



