206 INTELLIGENCE IN INSECTS 
little. The celebrated instance adduced by Leuckart of 
ants bringing grains of sand to cover a streak of tobacco 
solution across their trail may be explained in a similar way. 
Another instance. Kirby and Spence record a case 
communicated by a German artist, whom they were assured 
was “a man of strict veracity.” A dung beetle, having 
made a pellet for the reception of its eggs, found that it was 
unable to roll the pellet out of a depression into which it 
had fallen. The beetle then repaired to a dung heap near by 
and returned with three companions, with whose assistance 
the ball was rolled out, after which the three beetles took 
their departure. This is one of the evidences from which 
insects are considered to be “able to communicate and 
<Yeceive information, which, in whatever way effected, 
-would be impracticable if they were devoid of reason.” 
Blanchard in his “Metamorphoses, Mceurs et Instincts 
des Insectes,” gives an account of a very similar performance, 
which the author considers to evince “une intelligence de la 
situation vraiment étonnante, et une facilité de communica- 
tion entre les individus de la méme espéces, plus surprenante 
encore.” Here again we must take into consideration the 
normal instinctive behavior of these insects. Frequently 
two or more beetles are found rolling the same ball. As 
Fabre has shown in his careful studies of the sacred scarab, 
an allied beetle with similar habits, such associations are 
dependent on quite different motives than the altruistic 
desire of rendering assistance. The helpful comrades turn 
out to be bent on getting the ball for themselves. Sometimes 
they abandon the task voluntarily; often they wage a com- 
bat with the original owner. The succoring of a comrade in 
distress is only an appearance which a fuller study of the 
habits of these insects places in a quite different light. 
These cases illustrate a common source of erroneous 
