364 REVIEWS DR, LANKESTER's LECTURES. 



"It is found in feeding horses, that if you give them beans or oats alone they 

 will not do so well as if you mix with these more nutritive foods a quantity 

 of chaff chopped straw, which is little more than cellulose. It appears to me 

 that man has the same relation to these things, and that he requires some in- 

 digestible food. In all our food there is a certain quantity of indigestible 

 matter, and if it does not disagree it acts beneficially. This is one recom- 

 mendation of brown bread, it contains more cellulose than flour. Those who 

 can eat brown bread habitually have better health than those who cannot, or 

 who persist in eating white bread.'' 



It may be well also to present to our readers the author's judgment 

 with which we entirely agree on the question of the fitness of our 

 using animal food. We cannot, indeed, copy the illustrative wood- 

 cuts to which he refers, but they are scarcely necessary to the argu- 

 ment, and any one who desires it may actually refer to the objects 

 themselves, substituting for the tiger's skull an inspection of the 

 mouth of a domestic cat. 



"Let me add now a few words on the subject of living only on vegetable 

 food. You know from what I have said that I am an advocate of a mixed diet 

 for man but I would more particularly draw your attention to a statement that 

 is often made, that it is not necessary to partake of animal food at all. Persons 

 who argue thus, put forth, as a first ground, the immorality of the act, and the 

 impropriety and wickedness of taking away life at all. This is surely an 

 absurd assumption ; for the Creator has made a certain number of creatures 

 that could not live upon vegetable food, and they naturally prey upon the lower 

 animals which feed on the grass and the herbs of the field. The lion and tiger 

 exist by prey ; and it appears to me that man has a perfect right, without being 

 charged with immorality or impropriety, to take the lives of the lower animals 

 for his food. 



Then anatomical arguments are adduced against animal food. It is said that 

 man, in his structure, is better adapted for vegetable than animal food. I must 

 here again join issue, for I believe I can shew you from his structure that man 

 is more adapted for a mixed diet than either vegetable or animal alone. Here 

 is a view of the jaws and teeth of a carnivorous creature. The jaws are so 

 constructed that they will only move up and down like a pair of scissors. This 

 is the head of a tiger. Look also at his sharp-pointed carnivorous teeth, 

 especially the great canine teeth. They are intended for holding and cutting 

 up living food. Now look at the horse. His lower jaw is quite movable from 

 side to side. Instead of pointed teeth, they are flat, and every arrangement is 

 made for grinding, not cutting the food ; and this is the character of the mouth 

 of a herbivorous animal. 



Now if we take the skull of a man we find he has certain teeth — canine teeth 



-which, like those of lions and tigers, have the power of cutting ; but he has 



also flat teeth, and the power of moving his lower jaw laterally, and can bring 

 these flat teeth across each other for the purpose of grinding his food •, so that 



