96 CUTHBERT COLLINGWOOD, ESQ., M.A., B.M. (OXON.), ETC, 
cases subservient to their habits and modes of life, and 
beneficial to their possessors, are born with them. For every 
animal acts according to what we call its nature; and if, in 
any particular, it aberrates from what is its settled and well- 
understood order of nature, we recognise in such a “freak of 
nature ”’—the exception, which proves the rule of its essen- 
tial character or nature. Every animal whatsoever is en- 
dowed with its own peculiar and specific affection, which is 
its nature, in obedience or subordination to which it performs 
every act, and manifests every mental expression. And this 
nature or affection is always corporeal in its scope and 
character, and invariably has reference solely to the two 
ereat master-functions of nutrition and reproduction. Every 
animal at its birth is in possession of the entire sum-total of 
its necessary knowledge and capabilities, and is completely 
adapted to, and qualified for, the mode of life which is con- 
sonant with its nature or quality—with the sole reservation 
of allowances for growth; some animals being called upon 
to exercise the functions of their existence at the very outset, 
and others.at a later period of their career. Every animal 
performs, untaught except by its nature, the specific acts 
which characterise it, and go to form its life-history, whether 
that be, as in the case of the sea-anemone, simply to await 
the stimulus of touch for the seizure of its prey, or whether, 
in the case of the bee, it is the problem of building perfectly- 
formed geometrical cells with the smallest expenditure of 
material. 
It is indeed true that certain variations in the degree of 
mental endowment are observable in different animals of the 
same species; but these variations are not indicative of any 
nearer approach in the better-endowed individuals to the 
lofty and remote degree of human intelligence, but are im no 
way more remarkable than the bodily variations which exist 
within the lnnits of species. Nor, indeed, are they even of 
so great weight in the argument; for, whereas the Evolu- 
tionist shows reason to believe that higher organic forms 
have.been developed from lower in such a manner as to 
leave no important gap in the animal series, mental endow- 
ments have certainly by no means kept pace with organisa- 
tion, For it is acknowledged by the same school that the 
difference between the mind of the lowest men and that of 
the highest animal is immense—in other words, immeasur- 
able—and in such a view we entirely concur. 
But it should be the duty of the mental evolutionist to 
explain, what as a matter of fact they cannot explain, nor 
