102 INTRODUCTION. 
writers, and are led by inferences from their own 
observations, rather than by the authority of names. 
We know it to be the opinion of foresters and hunts- 
men of the north and east of Europe, men generally 
well educated, who live wholly in the presence of 
nature. We are assured it is the doctrine of the 
Chinese and Tartars, particularly in the notice on 
dogs in the treatise on hunting under the names of 
Id, Ist, and Kuschuk. We know from personal 
inquiry, that both the North and South American 
Indians do not doubt their dogs being of the same 
origin with the wild canines of their forests; and, 
lastly, we may appeal to inferences drawn from 
conversations with Baron Cuvier, and laying aside 
what was merely verbal, point to his text, where, 
bearing in mind that he made it a law not to assert 
as fact that which he had not verified by personal 
inspection, speaking of dogs as a species, he never- 
theless admits that “ quelques naturalistes pensent 
que le chien est un loup, d'autres que cest un chacal 
apprivoisé: les chiens redevenus sauvages dans des 
iles desertes ne ressemblent cependant ni a lun ni 
a l’autre.”* He then notices the matin, a breed not 
known in England, but approaching our great farm- 
yard and drover dogs, as possessing a skull most 
similar to that of the wolf, though the ears are 
drooping. Further on,t speaking of the jackal, he 
says: “‘ cest un animal vorace, qui chasse a la ma- 
niere des chiens et paroit lui ressembler plus qu’au- 
* Regne Animal, vol. i. p. 149. + Ib. p. 151, 
- 
