Analysis of Dr. Hancock's theory, 77 



igencies. For supposing the higher orders of brutes are conscious 

 of the acts, they can be classed with no other operations of mind 

 with which we are acquainted." This is however qualified by 

 the following ~" Yet it would appear, that all the acts of apparent 

 reasoning in the lower animals have reference to some immediate 

 object of perception, or depend on the faculty of memory. As 

 they seem to be nearly incapable of forming any abstract notions 

 or speculations apart from sensible objects; and the want of arti- 

 culate language must ever oppose au insurmountable barrier to 

 their progress in acquired knowledge, beyond the merest indivi- 

 dual experience." 



The author then proceeds to examples, from which I select the 

 following as typical of the class. 



*' Dr. Abell, in one of his Lectures on Phrenology, related a 

 very striking anecdote of a Newfoundland dog in Cork. This 

 dog was of a noble and generous disposition ; and when he left 

 his master's house was often assailed by a number of little noisy 

 dogs in the street. He usually passed them with apparent un- 

 concern, as if they were beneath his notice. But one little cur 

 was particularly troublesome, and at length carried his petulance 

 so far as to bite the Newfoundland dog in the back of the foot. 

 This proved to be a step in wanton abuse and insult beyond what 

 was to be patiently endured ; and he instantly turned round, ran 

 after the offender, and seized him by the skin of the back. In 

 this way he carried him in his mouth to the quay, and holding 

 him for some time over the water, at length dropped hitn into it. 

 He did not seem, however, to design that the culprit should be 

 punished capitally, and he waited a little while till the poor 

 animal, who was unused to that element, was not only well 

 ducked, but near sinking, Avhen he plunged in, and brought him 

 out safe to land." 



Now when actions like these are adduced as illustrations of the 

 conscious reasoning powers in Animals, we must surely ascribe to 

 them something more than a mere ratiocinating faculty, as limited 

 by Dr. Hancock's theory : — in the present case a moral priaci* 

 pie, regulating the extent of punishment by the extent of crime. 

 Accordingly, in an implied agreement with this sentiment, Di. 



