7G INTRODUCTION. 



hog is constantly adduced, as analogous to the differences between 

 the Caucasian and Negro cranium. 15ut look nt the cause of ch 

 the wild animal is confined in a Bty, where his natural instinct of 

 rooting in the ground, for which his h iad is especially adapted, can- 

 not be exercised ; the powerful muscles attached t<> the m 

 being called into play, the bones to which they are attached, by a 

 physiological law , are modified accordingly. < Civilization, on the con- 

 trary, places man in a position whet tural powers are mora 

 advantageously exercised and increased. ation in animals 

 is a life of unnatural constraint and real degeneration. There i 

 only ii" , but not even the slightest resemblance, between them; 

 and, consequently, physical differences dependent thereon cannot lie 

 considered analogous. If the physical cha Lomestication are 

 analogous to any physical changes of man, it must be of ci\ 

 man, according to their analogy ; hut we have seen that civilization 

 does not physically change man; and, moreover, where would bo 

 the analogies of the savage tribes of the greater part of our globe, 

 among whom exists the only difficulty to be explained 1 



Neither are the moral and intellectual qualities of man anal 

 in kind and degree to the qualities of domestic animals. Dr. Prich- 

 ard talks about "psychological chat »" of animals, as if 



they had suoh. Animals have but ;i tare, a bodily nature, 



depending on, and connected with, their external senses ; man lias, 

 in addition, a spiritual nature, connecting him with eternity, which 

 animals have not. Animals have no moral nature. Man is, also, a 

 progressive being, and must therefore have an intellectual element, 

 capable of improvement. Animals are created perfect, with instincts 

 capable of no improvement; animals have no intellectual nature ; 

 animals of themselves never improve ; man improves of himself, 

 from a law of his nature.* In any view, therefore, animals furnish 

 no analogies with man, in either physical, moral or intellectual prop- 



*Prichard's theory required that animals should be the analogues of 

 men, and it was therefore necessary to raise animals, or sink man to their 

 level. By merely substituting the word "psychological" for "instinct- 

 ive " characteristics, says Van Amringe, he raised the whole animal 

 kingdom to the required level. He thus got related the psychology of 

 animals and man, " without the trouble of philosophically accomplishing 

 so impossible a thing ;" and thus obtained " a specious right to use bees 

 and wasps, rats and dogs, sheep, goats and rabbits, in short, the whole 

 animal kingdom, as human psychical analogues, which would be amaz- 

 ingly convenient, when conclusions were to be made." 



