1884.] OF THE INDIVIDUAL AND OF THE SPECIES. 465 



spicules — into perfect white spheres, each having a single fissured 

 orifice. Another (which makes a many-chambered test Hke the shell 

 of an Orthoceratite, the conical mouth of each chamber projecting 

 into the cavity of the next), while forming the walls of its chambers 

 of ordinary sand-grains rather loosely held togetlier, shapes tlie conical 

 mouths of its successive chambers by firmly cementing together grains 

 of ferruginous quartz, which it must have picked out from the general 

 mass." On considering such remarkable diiferences in action, be- 

 tween creatures of structures so simple and so similar, the question 

 naturally arises, "May not the differences be due to diversities of 

 niolecular structure ? " That structural differences which our senses 

 cannot detect, exist not only between all the kinds, but also between 

 all the individuals, is what no one can reasonably deny ; but as such 

 differences cannot be known by observation, whereas the differences 

 of habit can be so known, an attempt to explain the latter by the 

 power would be to explain obscurian per obscitrius. Moreover, it 

 is very difiicult to see how such molecular difference alone, can 

 govern the shape and ornamentation of the flask whicli a particle 

 of protoplasm constructs to shelter its own amorphous substance. 

 Moreover Mr. Carter has recorded ' observations with regard to 

 actions of other Rhizopods which at the least have much appearance 

 of being instinctive. There are also actions performed by animals 

 not so very much higher in the scale — certain Ccelentera and 

 Echinoderma ', which must I think be allowed to be instinc- 

 tive by all who hold that Instinct is generally beneficial vital 

 action in which sensation intervenes. That sensation, in some 

 form, does intervene in these animals, is, in my opinion, so far shown 

 by the possession of a distinct nervous system, that we may assume 

 it in the absence of any good reason to the contrary being brought 

 forward. 



When a nervous system, however, does not exist, we cannot 

 venture to assert the presence of any true sensation. The, at least 

 seemingly, instinctive actions in the lowest animals may then serve 

 to introduce to our consideration certain actions in ourselves and in 

 other animals which are not generally reckoned as " instinctive." 



Before, however, proceeding to their consideration, I would say a 

 few words on the subject of " lapsed intelligence." I am strongly 

 persuaded that "lapsed intelligence" will not explain "Instinct" 

 generally, but I should be the last to deny that certain instinctive 

 actions may be so explained, and I fully admit that intelligent action 

 in ourselves does tend to become instinctive. It is also fortunate 

 for us that it does so tend, as thereby we are saved great mental 

 friction, and our intelligence is, as it were, set free to appropriate and 

 render instinctive a continually wider and more important range of 

 dehberate, purposive actions. 



That such " lapsed intelligence " will not, however, explain all 

 instinctive actions, seems to me clear from a consideration both of 

 the lowest, or most simple, instinctive actions on the part of ourselves 



' Aun. of Nat. Hist. 3rd series, 18fi3. 



" See • Animal Intelligence,' by G. J. Eouiaiies, pp. 22, 23. 



