THE ZooLocisTt—OcrToBER, 1876. 5093 
On Human and Brute Intelligence. 
By F. H. Batkwi1t, Esq. 
WRITERS on mental science have hitherto been careful to 
exclude the mental or moral faculties of the lower animals from the 
limits of their subject before entering upon the examination of those 
of man: or if they have compared human with brute intelligence, 
it has been in its most violent contrasts, with the object of 
establishing essential differences. 
This may have arisen from that feeling of pride which considers 
it derogatory to man’s moral dignity to trace any kinship, however 
remote, between him and his humbler fellow-creatures ; and from 
a suspicion that to allow the possibility of any such discussion 
must be disloyal to the belief, cherished by man, that he has a soul 
capable of an immortality not to be attained by brutes; but also, 
and I think principally, from ignorance. 
At any rate, in consequence of the knowledge which has been 
accumulated and systematised by modern naturalists, and more 
particularly in consequence of “ Darwin’s theory” having suggested 
an hereditary connection between them, there is a wave of thought 
now passing over us which makes the tracing and comparing of 
the affinities, between the intelligence of man and the brutes, 
inevitable. Such a comparison cannot fail to give some aid 
towards the comprehension of each, even if we are not yet able 
to lay down exactly wherein lies the great difference between 
them. 
The more highly organised the animal, the greater its intelli- 
gence; so that the development of this faculty may be expected 
to keep pace in parallel steps with the evolution of physical 
organisation. 
The embryonic stages in the growth of many animals show 
marked resemblance to species lower in the scale. This fact 
has been pointed out in support of an hereditary connection: in 
the same way, when we analyse the human intelligence, in order 
to conceive its simplest state and growth, we find a parallel 
resemblance to the evolution of intelligence as conditioned by the 
organisation of the lower animals. It may be roughly tabulated 
thus— 
SECOND SERIES—VOL, XI. 3A 
