INTELLIGENCE, ETC., IN LOWER ANIMALS 73 



man a power of demonstrative reasoning 1 to which 

 animals do not attain. In this he substantially agrees 

 with Aristotle, 1 who maintained that in animals the 

 germs of the psychical qualities of the man are evident, 

 though, as in the child, they are undeveloped. Hume's 

 teaching- also accords with modern views ; comparative 

 anatomy, for instance, " is easily able to show that, 

 physically, man is but the last term of a long 1 series of 

 forms, which lead by slow gradations from the highest 

 mammal to the almost formless speck of living proto- 

 plasm, which lies on the shadowy boundary between 

 animal and vegetable life." 2 



The detailed proofs which Hume was not enough of 

 a naturalist to furnish were at length stated with admir- 

 able clearness and force by Leroy, whose Letters on 

 Animals form the most important contribution made 

 to the discussion during our period. Georges Leroy 

 (1723-1789) was lieutenant des chasses under the last 

 French kings, and had charge of the parks at Versailles 

 and Marly. He wrote therefore with knowledge about 

 the wolf, fox, deer, rabbit, and dog. His pages are 

 enlivened by many touches of nature, interesting to 

 readers who perhaps care little about psychology. 

 Leroy attributes to the wolf observation, comparison, 

 judgment. The wolf must mark the height of the fold 

 which encloses a flock, and judge whether he can clear 

 it with a sheep in his mouth. Wolf and she-wolf co- 

 operate artfully in the running-down of prey. Some- 

 times the she-wolf will draw off the sheep-dog in pursuit, 

 thus putting the flock at the mercy of her mate. Or one 



T Hist. Animalium^ VIII. , i. 



8 Huxley's Hume^ chap. v. Some few naturalists, who are 

 entitled to respectful attention, such as Father Wasmann, author 

 of The Psychology of Ants , do not even now receive the conclusions 

 of Hume. 



