84 CUTHBERT COLLINGWOOD, ESQ., M.A., B.M. (OXON.), ETC. 
and their meutal endowments ; only, differmg in either. 
respect from him in the sense that savage Man differs from 
his more fortunate civilised brethren. 
For current science, not content with the array of facts 
which suggest that, as to his physical body, Man exhibits so 
close a relationship with animals as to favour the hypothesis 
that the evolutionary process has extended to him through 
them, further endeavours to prove that the mental pheno- 
mena of those same animals are of so identical a nature that 
they cannot be separated by any expressed distinction or 
conceivable character from those exhibited by intellectual 
Man himself, any more than they can separate the genus 
Homo by any organic classificatory distinction from the 
genera of the higher or anthropoid apes. 
According to the modern school of Biology, Man differs so 
little from the higher apes that “there is no just ground for 
placing him in a distinct order ;” and Mr. Huxley, therefore, 
includes them both under one order, which he terms 
Primates. Both structure and development prove Man to 
have a close physical relationship to the animal world; but 
we are further assured that his moral qualities also have 
been evolved from certain instincts characteristic of the 
lower animals, while his intellectual powers are absolutely 
shared, m a lower degree, by existing animal races. In other 
words, it is held that Man’s moral sense (including his 
spiritual faculties—if, indeed, he be allowed to possess any) 
has been developed out of certain social instincts character- 
istic of animals, including sympathy, which instincts were 
themselves acquired through the agency of natural selec- 
tion, 
It is admitted, however, by all, that Man possesses a 
sense of responsibility, which, while it demands a certain 
course of conduct (which is held to form three-fourths of 
life), and is claimed by none for the animal world, is yet 
affirmed to be also developed from some obscure animal 
instincts—instinects, that is, im beings in which no such 
sense of responsibility or resultant conduct does, or ever did, 
or even could conceivably exist. We are not instructed how 
a strictly positive quality has been developed out of a strictly 
negative quality—how the distinguishing character of the 
human mind has been evolved from totally different instincts 
in the animal, in which its principle is wholly wanting. All 
this we are to take upon scientific authority, which would 
have us believe that the simple but uncomprehended 
instincts of animals, which are palpably corporeal in their 
