230 THE ZOOLOGIST. 



breeding or ' cross ; breeding, we are making use of cross- 

 fertilization. Further, I may add, the difference between inter- 

 crossing and hybridizing is one of degree, not of kind." 



This book is beautifully illustrated, characteristically bound, 

 and, unfortunately, unprovided with an index. 



Wild Animals I have Known. By Ernest Seton Thompson. 

 New York City : C. Scribner's Sons. 



Mr. Thompson is the Carlyle of the animal world outside 

 man : he sees the Zingis Khan, the Attila, the Napoleon among 

 his Wolves, the Rachel among his Foxes, the bandit chief leading 

 his Dogs. "What satisfaction would be derived from a ten-page 

 sketch of the habits and customs of Man ? How much more 

 profitable it would be to devote that space to the life of some one 

 great man. This is the principle I have endeavoured to apply 

 to my animals." Thus we have a few vivid and brilliant sketches 

 of animal life which we should unhesitantly describe as a new 

 departure in fiction, were we not warned in a "Note to the 

 Reader," " these stories are true." We are not led to the 

 sceptical position by any unreality of the narrative, but rather 

 marvel at the psychological sympathy with, and apprehension of, 

 ideas and conceptions which are so commonly described as 

 belonging to the instincts of brutes. The story of the King-wolf 

 Lobo, who remains unconquered by his many justly-incensed 

 enemies, and who by his cunning, or intellect, defies all their 

 stratagems, till the death of his loved bitch Blanca renders him 

 reckless, and proves his undoing, is only another story of the 

 rise and fall of the great and much-admired man-wolf amongst 

 ourselves. The Dog Bingo that must go wolfing, but comes 

 home to die ; the Fox Vix, courageous to frenzy on behalf of her 

 young, are amongst some of the strongest characters of this 

 more than interesting book. We are often warned against 

 ascribing our own mental processes to other animals, and thus 

 forming erroneous conclusions as to their cognitions and psycho- 

 logy. Do we not rather greatly err on the other side ? Is it 

 not more reasonable to argue that we have indeed passed on, but 

 that in leaving them behind we have not altogether severed our 



