Analysis of Dr. Hancock's Theory. 169 



tary memory, and let us suppose them to exercise their ideas upoa 

 distance^ — and there is no more absurdity in this, than in the 

 supposition that they regard from reason the relations necessary to 

 the acts enumerated in Dr. Hancock's examples : — let them then 

 reason upon distance, — a rational idea of which is one of the most 

 obvious they could entertain, — and a conception of the relative 

 distance of objects being thus supposed possible to them, the idea 

 of measurement will also be possible ; or a capability of attaining 

 it will in such case exist. If we suppose them to perceive, 

 in a rational manner, the difference between a right and a 

 curved line, a difference which affects every object they can 

 behold, — they would be enabled to draw from this source ideas of 

 form^ founded on the rational perception of such difference ; this 

 they must do if their perceptions of objects in these respects were 

 rational in their nature. Hence it is evident they must, supposing 

 them rational in any degree, or in their perceptions of the most 

 obvious and common properties of external objects, possess a capa- 

 bility to attain ideas of measurement and form, as such, or objec- 

 tive ideas of measurement and form. But it would be absurd 

 to suppose the Brute capable, in common with the savage or 

 uncivilized man, of a knowledge of measurement, as such; and 

 as this knowledge is essential to a rational apprehension of these 

 qualities, it is plain the brute cannot be endowed with human 

 rational ideas or discriminations upon these subjects, and that his 

 ideas and discriminations must consist of modifications peculiar to 

 him; although, if we judged from the actions of the latter, alone 

 considered, the contrary might well be inferred. 



The Brute therefore, it appears to me, has no idea of distance, 

 measurement, or form, as such: and in like manner he has no 

 idea of the difference between any two objects, — between a Yew 

 tree and an Oak, — by any rational knowledge of them : these 

 .objects make two different impressions on him, through the organ 

 of sight, and he may exhibit an intuitive preference, or be led by 

 some association to prefer one of them; but he cannot rationally 

 compare them, and therefore has no essential knowledge concerning 

 them : — he is just in the same predicament with respect to these. 



