224: COMPARATIVE ZOOLOGY. 



to say precisely what shall guide us in assorting living 

 forms into high and low. Shall we make structure the 

 criterion of rank? Plainly the simple Jelly-fish is be- 

 neath complicated Man. An ounce of muscle is worth a 

 pound of protoplasm, and a grain of nervous matter is of 

 more account than a ton of flesh. The intricate and fin- 

 ished build of the Horse elevates him immeasurably above 

 the stupid Snail. The repetition of similar parts, as in the 

 Worm, is a sign of low life. So also a prolonged posterior 

 is a mark of inferiority, as the Lobsters are lower than the 

 Crabs, Snakes than Lizards, Monkeys than Apes. The 

 possession of a head distinct from the region behind 

 it is a sign of power. And in proportion as the fore- 

 limbs are used for head purposes, the animal ascends 

 the scale : compare the Whale, Horse, Cat, Monkey, and 

 Man. 



But shall the Fish, never rising above the " monotony 

 of its daily swim," be allowed to outrank the skilful Bee? 

 Shall the brainless, sightless, almost heartless Amphioxus, 

 a Vertebrate, be allowed to stand nearer to Man than the 

 Ant? What is the possession of a backbone to intelli- 

 gence? No good reason can be given why we might not 

 be just as intelligent beings if we carried, like the Insect, 

 our hearts in our backs and onr spinal cords in our breasts. 

 So far as its activity is concerned, the brain may be as ef- 

 fective if spread out like a map as packed into its present 

 shape. Even animals of the same type, as Vertebrates, 

 cannot be ranked according to complexity. For while 

 Mammals, on the whole, are superior to Birds, Birds to 

 Reptiles, and Reptiles to Fishes, they are not so in every 

 respect. Man himself is not altogether at the head of 

 creation. We carry about in our bodies embryonic struct- 

 ures. That structural affinity and vital dignity are not 

 always parallel may be seen by comparing an Australian 

 and an Englishman. m 



