DEVIOUS PATHS 
prairie-dogs, more among moose than among sheep 
or buffalo, more among grouse than among quail. 
But I do not know that this is true. 
Yet among none of these would one expect to 
find the diversity of individual types that one finds 
among men. No two dogs of the same breed will be 
found to differ as two men of the same family often 
differ. An original fox, or wolf, or bear, or beaver, 
or crow, or crab, — that is, one not merely different 
from his fellows, but obviously superior to them, 
differing from them as a master mind differs from 
the ordinary mind, — I think, one need not expect 
to find. It is quite legitimate for the animal-story 
writer to make the most of the individual differ- 
ences in habits and disposition among the animals; 
he has the same latitude any other story writer has, 
but he is bound also by the same law of probability, 
the same need of fidelity to nature. If he proceed 
upon the theory that the wild creatures have as pro- 
nounced individuality as men have, that there are 
master minds among them, inventors and discov- 
erers of new ways, born captains and heroes, he will 
surely “o’erstep the modesty of nature.” 
The great diversity of character and capacity 
among men doubtless arises from their greater and 
more complex needs, relations, and aspirations. 
The animals’ needs in comparison are few, their 
relations simple, and their aspirations nil. One can- 
not see what could give rise to the individual types 
119 
