Zoology as Related to Evolution. 231 



DR. LEWIS G. JANES: 



That I have greatly enjoyed the able and suggestive paper of Mr. 

 Kimball goes without saying. I find little in it for dissent or criti- 

 cism. Possibly I may not carry my millennial expectations quite so 

 far as the lecturer has indicated, but I think we are making some 

 progress in recognition of our relationship and duties to our brute 

 neighbors. Indeed, I go so far as to dissent from the last speaker and 

 to believe that we are in advance in this respect not only of the an- 

 cients, but of the pagan world of the present day. I doubt very much 

 whether the ancients or the modern Buddhists were and are as kind 

 to their animals as we have been led to suppose. In the matter of 

 ethical sanctions we constantly find two diverse attitudes illustrated 

 that of authority arbitrarily imposed, the " Thou shall " and " Thou 

 shalt not " of an arbitrary moral code, enforced usually by religious 

 aid, and that of the higher law of spontaneous right action which bids 

 us serve the right for love of such service and which ultimates in the 

 extinction of the sense of constraint and obligation. The ancient 

 Egyptians and the Buddhists were commanded by their religion to 

 honor certain animals and refrain from killing them, yet Prof. 

 Haeekel, in his Voyage to Ceylon, speaks indignantly of the cruelties 

 inflicted by the Buddhists of that country on their domestic animals 

 which only stopped short of the infliction of death. They seemed to 

 see no wrong in torturing and maltreating dumb creatures provided 

 they did not actually kill them. Their obedience was to the " letter 

 that killeth " ; ours, yet far from complete, is, so far as it is effective, 

 intelligent, and ingrained, a recognition of the spirit which giveth 

 life. The lesson of the duty of kindness to our dumb relations, how- 

 ever, is yet needed, and can not be too strongly and frequently en- 

 forced. 



DB. P. H. VANDER WEYDE : 



I had anticipated listening to a lecture of a somewhat different 

 character this evening to a more strictly scientific discussion of the 

 evolution of animal life. As life develops from its lowest forms, it 

 differentiates into several distinct families or divisions based upon 

 peculiarities of structure. The lowest of these are the radiates, of which 

 the star-fish is a familiar example, their organs and limbs being built 

 up around a central axis as a plant grows. Next we have the articu- 

 lata, illustrated by many insects and worms, constructed as it were in 

 distinct, articulated sections ; and these are followed by the mollusca, 

 or oyster class. I once listened to a lecture by Prof. Agassiz which 

 was devoted to proving that a clam was more intelligent than an 



