28 



• KNOWLEDGE • 



[Nov. 11, 1881. 



But — aftor all l>ut jfrazing tlio sun — swopping round him 

 at a ilistanco of less than one-tonth of his diameter, the 

 comet escaped and passed hack afjnin into space. 



When wo see the tail of a comet occupying a volume 

 thousands of timos greater than that of the sun itself, 

 the (|uestion naturally suggests itself, " how does it 

 happen that so vast a liody can sweep through the 

 solar system without deranging the motion of every 

 planet/" Conceding even an extreme tenuity to the 

 suVistaiice composing so vast a volume, one would still 

 I'xpect its mass to he tremendous. For instance, if we 

 supposed the whole mass of the tail of the comet of 1843 

 to consist of hydrogen gas (the lightest substance known 

 to us), yet even then the mass of the tail would have 

 largely exceeded that of the sun. Every j)lanet would 

 iiave been dragged from its orbit by so vast a mass 

 passing so near. We know, on the contrary, that no such 

 effects were produced. The length of our year did not 

 change Viy a single second, showing that our earth luul 

 been neither hastened nor retarded in its steady riiotiou 

 round the sun. Thus we are forced to admit that the 

 actual substance of the comet was inconceivably rare. A 

 jar-full of air would probably have outweighed hundreds 

 of cubic miles of that vast appendage which blazed across 

 our skies, to the terror of the ignorant and superstitious. 



The dread of the possible evils which might accrue if 

 the earth encountered a comet will possibly be diminished 

 by tlie consideration of the extreme tenuity of these objects. 

 But the feeling may still remain, that influences, other 

 than those due to mere weight or mass, might be exerted 

 upiin terrestrial races in the course of such an encounter. 

 The subtle breath of some mephitic vapour might penetrate 

 our atmosphere, and, if it did not bring immediate destruc- 

 tion, might lea^•e dire forms of plague and pestilence to 

 w^ork their evil will upon the human race. This fear is 

 not, perhaps, wholly unreasonable, though — as will pre- 

 sently appear — the positive information we now have does 

 not favour the supposition that the tail, at any rate, of a 

 comet is likely to exercise such destructive effects. And 

 it is only the tails of comets that we have much chance of 

 meeting. On account of their enormous volumes, it is not 

 so utterly improbable that we should encounter them as 

 that we should meet the comparatively minute nuclei. In 

 fact, there is reason for supposing that the earth actually 

 did pass through the tail of the comet of 1861. At about 

 the hour when it was calculated that the encounter should 

 have taken place, a strange auroral glare was seen in the 

 atnjosphere, but beyond this, no effect was perceptible. 



INTELLIGENCE IN ANIMALS. 



FEW of the questions raised in Darwin's " Descent of 

 j\Ian '' are at once more difficult to deal with satis- 

 factorily, or more important in their bearing on the 

 subject of tliat volume, than the question how far animals 

 possess mental powers akin to those of man. It is some- 

 what singular, we may remark in passing, that Darwin 

 and Huxley, whose views in some respects are so similar, 

 and who arc regarded by the general public as standing 

 side by side in their advocacy of the theory of the relation- 

 ship of man to the lower animals, should seem to uphold 

 almost exactly opposite opinions respecting the cerebral 

 qualities of animals — one maintaining that in some cases 

 animals reason, while the other (if we rightly apprehend 

 what Huxley has said about animal automatism) will 

 Scarcely allow that animals even possess consciousness. 

 We propose here to consider some cases in which animals 



have seemed to reason. The importance of the subject w i 

 be recognised if we remember Darwin's admission tli:.' 

 had no organic being except man possessed any mei;' 

 power, or if man's powers had been of a wholly diffen 

 nature from those of the lower animals, we should nt 

 have been able to convince ourselves that our liigh faculti 

 had been gradually developed. Darwin expres.ses his lx!i 

 that there is no fundamental difference of this kind. '• N'- 

 must also admit," he says, "that there is a much wid 

 interval in mental power between one of the lowest fish 

 as a lamprey or a lancelet, and one of the higher ap' . 

 than between an ape and a man ; yet this immense interval 

 is filled up by numberless gi-adations." But this has not 

 been so generally admitted, despite the evidence advanced 

 by Darwin, as might have been expected. The feeling is 

 still commonly entertained that a distinction e.xists between 

 the mental qualities of the cleverest ape and the dullest and 

 stupidest savage, which is utterly unlike any that exists 

 among animals. In this essay we shall have to consider 

 cases in which rats, cats, dogs, ic, — animals all inferior in 

 mental faculties, though not all in equal degree, to the 

 moi-e intelligent apes — have acted in ways which seem to 

 imply reasoning. We shall treat these cases rather from tlie 

 point of view of an opponent of Darwin's thesis above quoted 

 than of a supporter, endeavouring in every case to find ex- 

 planations not involving the exercise of reasoning faculties. 

 But we must admit at the outset, that we find ourselves 

 led to precisely the conclusion which he has indicated. 



In the first place, we must recall to our reader's re- 

 collection those instances which have been selected by 

 Darwin as so satisfactory, that in his opinion any one mot 

 convinced by them would not be convinced by anything 

 that he could add. 



Rengger states, says Darwin, " that when he first gave 

 eggs to his monkeys, they smashed them, and thus lost 

 much of their contents ; afterwards they gently hit one end 

 against some hard body, and picked ofl' the bits of shell 

 with their fingers. After cutting themselves only once with 

 any sharp tool, they would not touch it again, or would 

 handle it with the greatest care. Lumps of sugar were 

 often given them wrapped up in paper, and Reugger some- 

 times put a live wasp in the paper, so that in hastily un- 

 folding it they got stung " (the tenderness of some of these 

 students of science towards animals is quite touching). 

 " After this had once happened, tliey always firet held the 

 packet to their ears, to detect any movement vithin." 

 These were not monkeys of the higher orders, but Ameri- 

 can monkeys, none of which are so near man in cerebral 

 development as the orang, the chimpanzee, the gibbon, or 

 the gorilla. The next cases relate to the dog, and are im- 

 portant, first, because two independent observers give evi- 

 dence in the same direction ; and secondly, because the 

 action of the dogs can hardly be explained as resulting 

 from the modification of an instinct. " Mr. Colquhoun 

 winged two wild ducks, which fell on the opposite sides of 

 a stream ; his retriever tried to liring o\-er both at once, 

 but could not succeed ; slie then, though never before 

 known to ruffle a feather, deliberately killed one, brought 

 over the other, and returned for the dead bird. Colonel 

 Hutchinson relates that two parti'idges were shot at once, 

 one being killed, the otlier wounded ; the latter ran away, 

 and was caught by the retriever, who on his return came 

 across the dead bird. ' She stopped, e\"idently greatly 

 puzzled, and aft(>r one or two trials, finding she could not 

 take it up without permitting the escape of the winged 

 bird, she considered a moment, then delibemtely murdered 

 it' (the winged bird), 'by giving it a severe crunch, and 

 afterwards brought away both together. This was the only 

 known instance of her having wilfully injured any game.' 



