Sept* 14, 1805. j 



FOkfeSt AKb STREAM. 



Nov. 6.— Oxford, Mass.— New England Beagle Club trials. W. 8* 

 Clark, Sec'y. 



Nov. ?.— Newton, N. C.-TJ. S. Field Trial Club's Trials A. W. B. 

 Stafford, Sec'y, Trenton, Tenn. 



Nov. 11.— Hempstead, L. I — National Beagle Club of America, fifth 

 annual trials. Geo. W. Rogers, Sec'y, 250 West Twenty-second street, 

 New York. 



Nov. 18.— Eastern F. T. Club, at Newton, N. 0. W. A. Coster, 

 Sec'y, Saratoga Springs, N. Y. 



Nov. 25.— Continental Field Trials Club's quail trials at Newton. 

 P. T. Madison, Sec'y, Indianapolis, Ind. 



Dec 2 to 4.— High Point, N. C— Irish Setter Club's trials. Geo. H. 

 Thompson, Sec'y. 



1896. 



Jan. 20.-Bakers«eld, Cal.— Pacific Coast Field Trial Club. J. M. 

 Kilgarif, Sec'y. 



Jan. 20.— West Pbint, Miss.— U. 8. F. T. C. trials. W. B. Stafford, 

 Sec'y. 



Feb. 8.— West Point, Miss.— Southern F. T. C. seventh annual trials. 

 T. M. Brumby, Sec'y. 



COURSING. 



Sept. 24.— Lisbon, N. D.— Cheyenne Valley Coursing Club's meeting. 

 H. C. Waterhouse, Sec'y. 



Oct 1.— Aberdeen, S. D.— Aberdeen Coursing Club's meeting. J. H. 

 Davis, Sec'y. 



Oct. 8.— Huron, S. D.— American Waterloo Cup. F. B. Coyne, Sec'y. 

 Oct. S3.— Goodlaiid, Kan.— Altcar Coursing Club's meeting. T. W. 

 Bartels, Sec'y. 



Oct. 28 — Goodland, Kan.— Kenmore Coursing Club's meeting. C. F. 

 Weber, Sec'y. 



THE DOG'S IMMORTALITY. 



Previous articles on this topic have been: May 25, a review of Dr. 

 Adams's book, ' Where is my Dog? or, Is Man Alone Immortal?" 

 June 29, "The Language of Dogs," by Gazehound; Aug. 10, "TheDog'B 

 Immortality," by Ego; Aug. 24. "The Dog's Immortality," by Charles 

 Josiah Adams; Sept. 7, ''The Dog'B Immortality," by Ego and by 

 Hermit. Mr. Adams'B book is published by Fowler & Wells, of this 

 city. 



St. Augustine, Fla., Aug. 30. — Editor Forest and 

 Stream: I am very glad the Rev. Mr. Adams continues 

 the discussion in your issue of Aug. 24 in regard to the 

 dog's immortality. There is no better field in which to 

 continue the debate than the Forest and Stream, for its 

 multitude of readers are — or at least a great majority of 

 them — acute and sympathetic observers of animals, and 

 better and more accurate observers in this line than the 

 greater number of professed scientific observers, and 

 especially than the most of the members of the clerical 

 profession, for they have all their old theological notions 

 standing in the way of a calm observation of the facts. 



If there is any faculty of man which the dog does not 

 show in some degree, I have failed to observe it. 



I will not weary the readers by a repetition of the facts 

 which have come under my own observation and which 

 I have already told in the Forest and Stream as to the 

 intelligence of the dog, and which all go toward a clear 

 establishment of the ego as the exhibition of the same 

 faculties in man. 



The fashion has been and still is to call all or almost all 

 the evidences of intelligence in animals instinct, which 

 has always appeared to me to be only another way of 

 dodging the force of facts. It in no way helps to an 

 intelligent discussion, but rather hinders, because it 

 don't account for the exhibition of intelligent action 

 at all; but assuming an incomprehensible faculty 

 Bhifts upon it, in an effort to avoid an immortal life for 

 the animal, all the phenomena of a complex existence. 



The immortal life follows an individual intelligence if 

 there is any immortal life at all. 



Man is but a higher animal, and it is rather presump- 

 tuous for him to lay claim to a never-ending existence 

 which he would deny to those only a little lower in the 

 scale of intelligence. W. 



Boston, Aug; 31.— Editor Forest and Stream: The very 

 interesting letter of Charles Josiah Adams in your issue of 

 Aug. 24 makes me regret that I have not yet had oppor- 

 tunity to read what evidently has been contributed on.this 

 subject to previous numbers of Forest and Stream. 



I want especially to see the letter of Ego, whom Mr. 

 Adams quotes as saying that "man has and the dog has 

 not the power of speech." I suspect that I am in accord 

 with Ego on this point, though equally ready to concede 

 every claim made by Mr. Adams as to the power of 

 animals to communicate with each other in a certain 

 way. 



1 think there can be no dispute as to the fact of such 

 communication. The only difference will be as to our 

 interpretation of it and as to exactly what we mean by 

 the words "ideas," "imagination," "speech," etc. 



It is obvious that in a question of this kind we cannot 

 help ourselves at all by a loose and uncritical use of these 

 words. 



My own belief, briefly stated, is that such communica- 

 tions as we all know animals are constantly making with 

 one another — for example, the frightened call of the hen 

 to her chickens when tne hawk is near, which call the 

 chickens so readily understand and respond to — do not 

 constitute real_"speech," i. e., in the highest sense, the one 

 which would indicate the conscious use of symbols to- 

 express abstract ideas. 



1 consider that true speech, in the higher, human sense, 

 and the power to use which would indicate a being that is 

 immortal, consists in just this, the conscious use of sym- 

 bols to express abstract ideas. 



It seems that up to date on this planet man alone, so far 

 as we know, has given evidence of possessing this power,, 

 and that it is this which gives him his enormous advan- 

 tage over the other animals and also his power of indefi- 

 nite improvement over himself. 



He accomplishes this self -improvement by taking ad- 

 vantage of the record of all previous discoveries and im- 

 provements, and adding to them his own, transmitting 

 the whole to his successors. If any other animal should 

 show this same power, even in a small degree, we should, 

 I think, at once accord it a human character, no matter 

 whether it walked on two legs or four, or whether it was 

 covered by a naked skin or by fur or feathers. 



Moreover, I think it would inevitably follow the posses- 

 sion of this power that it would manifest itself, as it does 

 in the human race, in genuine institutions of a human 

 character and with human purposes beyond those of the 

 merely animal nature. The fact that, so far as I know, 

 these do not appear to have been produced by any animal 

 but man, not even in the marvelous communal life of 

 many of the ants, bees and other insects, not to mention 

 the higher animals, such as the beaver, seems to me to 

 show that man, even in his lowest estate as we know him 

 now, has an endowment different in kind from any pos- 

 sessed by the highest animal. 



The animal is conscious. Man — even the lowest man — 

 is self-conscious, and incontestably proves it by the crea- 

 tion of language in the higher sense which I have named. 

 I believe that this power of self-consciousness, if properly 



and sufficiently interrogated, can be shown to constitute 

 a being which is immortal. 



This theory, it will be perceived, would accord immor- 

 tality to any creature whatever which manifested what I 

 have called genuine self-consciousness. I am well aware 

 that any argument at all adequate to prove that self-con- 

 sciousness is so important and so tranBcendently different 

 from mere consciousness would be too long and too differ- 

 ent from the purposes of Forest and Stream to find any 

 place in its columns. Perhaps I may, however, be per- 

 mitted a word on my definition of true speech as different 

 in kind from mere communication, I conceive that the 

 conscious creation and use of a symbol is a transcendency 

 of nature, the introduction into nature of something 

 higher than it— a truly human production made by a 

 spiritual being for the purposes of spirit-^and that this is 

 true in the most rudimentary and insignificant case of 

 real symbol making. 



It matters not whether the symbol is spoken or written 

 or consists merely in a motion like the affirmative nod or 

 the negative shake of the head. As something not the 

 product of instinct but of thought, as something not 

 natural but conventional, and argued upon between two 

 or more minds (conventional), it becomes speech and is 

 rational communication, and is capable of being preserved 

 as record. The highest symbol is the word, written or 

 spoken. Its labor-saving power is infinite, In a single 

 word we wrap up for use that which takes the place of 

 and fully represents to us an infinite number of individual 

 things or actions. Does any animal but man ever invent 

 such a symbol? Does any animal but man ever even use 

 such a symbol when it has been invented for him by man? 

 It seems to me we must answer that none ever does. 

 The parrot and some other animals — even the dog — as 

 cited by Mr. Adams, may repeat more or less correctly 

 the vocal sounds of a human word, may even learn to 

 repeat them according to acquired habit in expectation 

 of certain rewards; but, however in accordance with in- 

 telligence this may seem to be done, I Bubmit that in all 

 cases the intelligence is originally that of the human 

 trainer and not of the animal, and that the animal seems 

 to have no power to "take the cue," so to speak, and 

 apply our method in the making of symbols, much less in 

 transmitting to its offspring any of its painfully acquired 

 habit and advantage. 



Whenever we discover in any animal the power of in- 

 telligent use of a symbol as the representation of an ab- 

 stract thought we shall be able to enter into, rational 

 communication with him, and shall gladly accord to him 

 human character; and I for oneshall as gladly recognize 

 in him the attribute of immortality, which the facts of 

 the case — as I read them— do not at present permit me 

 to do. 



I could not in this space relieve my statement of the 

 appearance of dogmatism, but I have stated my belief in 

 the hope that it might suggest rejoinder or comment 

 from some of "the brethren," which would be sure to in- 

 terest me as Mr. Adams's letter has done. 



I too had a dog, the constant companion of my boy- 

 hood, separated from me by unavoidable necessity when 

 the pain of parting seemed more than the boy's heart 

 could bear, and which is keen and pathetic in memory 

 after the lapse of more than thirty-five years. Mr. Adams 

 will therefore understand how heartily I accord with 

 him in thinking "days not misspent in regarding our 

 still humbler fellow beings." C. H. Ames. 



Hamilton, One— Editor Forest and Stream: The 

 papers on the dog's immortality, which have appeared in 

 Torest and Stream from time to time, are very novel, 

 though they are short of the broad thoroughness which 

 science, in its impartiality, must observe in seeking for 

 truth. Most of them are notably deficient in considering 

 the immortality of the dog in connection with the immor- 

 tality of man, to the exclusion of all other animals: or at 

 least the lower animals are ignored. 



The most eminent physiologists have for a long time 

 agreed that there is nothing whatever as to quality by 

 which the physical and psychical nature of the lower 

 animals can be distinguished from those of man. The 

 difference is in degree, not in kind or quality. Amongst 

 men the psychic nature is not a fixed quantity. It is 

 dependent on the health or changes of the body, and is in 

 sympathetic touch with it at all times. The advantages 

 of man over the lower animals are not so distinct 

 as to establish absolute, distinct superiority. They are 

 •comparative only. In their kind, attributes of men and 

 lower animals, they are alike. The claim of absolute 

 superiority is arbitrary and unwarranted. To attribute to 

 instinct such varied action, action so managed and adapt- 

 ed to fit the rapid changes of material circumstance, is to 

 trust to the promptings of vanity instead of reason. On 

 this point an eminent writer remarks, "Instinct is a mere 

 empty word, a mere cloak for our ignorance or intellectual 

 indolence." 



Nor are the superior intellectual advantages of mankind 

 entirely due to superiority of intellect in itself. There are 

 matters of physical structure which greatly supplement 

 his intellectual force. His brain is larger, which shows 

 that intellect is not an independent quality, but the pro- 

 duct of a strong large brain organ, as force is the product 

 of large strong arm. Or if this simile be objected to then 

 it may be said that there must be a certain siae and tex- 

 ture for the proper production of thought, as there must 

 be the same in the material world for the production of 

 strength or force. Man, too, profits greatly by his organs 

 of speech, entirely a physical matter, and also by walking 

 erect and using his arms usefully, and also from their 

 varied prehensile powers. 



As more fully presenting the matter of degree, it is con- 

 ceded that there is an unbroken succession of intelligences 

 from the simplest forms in the lower animals up to the 

 higher and more complex forms shown by man, yet there 

 is a very wide reach from the intelligence of man in his 

 primitive savage state up to the most intelligent civilized 

 people. Neither the chemist nor the microscopist can dis- 

 cover any essential difference between human brains and 

 those of the lower animals. Such differences as there are 

 refer more to shape, etc., than to quality. The question 

 constantly reverts to the degree of difference, not the 

 quality. The attempts to establish an essential difference 

 nave all proved failures. 



The untaught elements of immortality, as distinct from 

 those which are acquired by experience, are present in 

 the lower animals in a remarkable degree. The attri- 

 butes of sympathy, love, loyalty, gratitude, friendship, 

 isense of duty, watchfulness, unselfishness and selfishness, 



perception of right and wrong, pride, shame, jealousy, 

 hatred, fear, deception, treachery, revenge, cunning, 

 foresight, premeditation, grief, pleasure, preparation and 

 provision for future needs, etc., are as apparent in the 

 mental life of the lower animals as the physical sensa- 

 tions of cold, heat, repletion, pain, comfort, etc., are in 

 their material life. The wonderful houses, bridges, tun- 

 nels, traps, caves, nests, etc., and the manner of life of 

 the lower animals present a phase again which differs not 

 in quality, but in degree. 



Man, in his ambition for supremacy in the world, has 

 ignored the material evidence of intelligent reason and 

 dismissed all the doings of the lower animals with a term 

 which was supposed to cover the most varied and active 

 doings of intelligent effort— that is to say, instincts 

 although he ignored the fact that he himself possessed 

 the recognized instincts in common with all animals. 

 The word instinct explains nothing. It is a convenient 

 term for use in matters which man does not understand. 

 Neither in man nor the lower animals is there an uncon- 

 scious, dominant force which impels him to meet all the 

 varying and rapid circumstances of life. Each cir- 

 cumstance hardly ever appears in the same com- 

 bination and new ones are constantly arising, so that, 

 without a comprehension of cause and effect, the 

 animal would be as helpless as a pumpkin on its vine. 

 There is no reason whatever for the assumption of in- 

 stinct only in the lower animals, aside from the race vanity 

 which prompts mankind to claim exclusive superiority. 

 Were they governed by instinct alone, a brain would be 

 unnecessary. As their brains vary, so do we find a vari- 

 ation in the intelligence of the lower animals, and an 

 adaptation to the ever-changing conditions and circum- 

 stances of their daily lives, which, as compared one 

 individual with another, are never alike, and often are 

 distinctly unlike. 



That many of the lower animals have a radically 

 distinct manner in applying means to ends from that 

 used by man all have observed. But this difference 

 again resolves into a matter of degree and not oi quality. 

 For instance, man as a hunter trusts to the senses of sight 

 and hearing when he is in pursuit of game, while the dog 

 trusts largely to his superior powers of scent. So delicate 

 is his organ of smell that he can follow a trail many 

 hours old if the atmospheric conditions are right. This 

 is said to be his instinctive manner— it would be quite as 

 logical to say that pursuit by eyesight is instinctive with 

 man. 



No doubt but what the sense of smell was once quite as 

 keenly developed in man as it is in any of the carnivora. 

 When he traveled on all fours or led a largely arboreal 

 life, his powers of scent were useful to him in his pursuit 

 of prey. When he learned to travel erect, he trusted 

 more to his eyesight in tracking his prey, a manner far 

 superior to scent when after big game, as all who have 

 read of the wonderful powers of the American Indians 

 and trappers in tracking horses, cattle, deer, men, etc. , 

 will promptly concede. By disuse the organ of sense 

 grew dull until at the present time it may be considered 

 to be left in a rudimentary form, like the dew-claw of the 

 dog or the vermiform appendix of the man. 



It would be indeed too bad if we were forced to believe 

 that the dog was created without a purpose other than 

 for a mere animal existence. It would not be a sufficient 

 explanation that he was made for a companion of man, 

 for such an insufficient reason would not explain such a 

 noble creation. In view of the facts, such explanation 

 is not true, for the dog flourishes in a wild state 

 entirely apart from man's society. If we could imagine 

 the human race entirely removed from the earth, there is 

 no doubt but what the dog would continue to exist inde- 

 pendently of man's society. Thus we cannot assume that 

 the purpose of the dog's existence is to furnish compan- 

 ionship to man, who is so fickle in his preferences and so 

 selfish in his companionships. Rather let us give the dog 

 the credit which is his due for his natural loyalty, affec- 

 tion and peculiar disposition, which make him so com- 

 panionable. 



We cannot call the dog specially created for man's 

 benefit, nor can we call the tiger especially created as his 

 enemy. 



But, from whichever point of view we investigate the 

 subject, the same phenomena which indicate the immor- 

 tality of man indicate ^hat of the lower animals also. 



Transit. 



Montreal Show. 



Montreal, Sept. 1.— It is the intention of the commit- 

 tee to make this show a model one in every particular, 

 not so much in the matter of numbers as in the general 

 management and accommodation of exhibits. The build- 

 ing, which is capable of holding comfortably some 500 

 dogs, has been erected under the supervision of the com- 

 mittee, and special attention was paid to comfort, ventila- 

 tion and sanitary arrangements. We will have a large 

 space fenced off for an exercising ground, and if the 

 weather permits the judging rings will be in the open 

 air. 



Dogs from the United States exhibited at Toronto and 

 entered for this show will be received (if so desired) any 

 time after Saturday, 14th inst. This is for the accommo- 

 dation of exhibitors from abroad. 



George K. Lanigan. 



The Toronto Show Entries. 



The following are the 633 entries for the seventh annual 

 bench show of the Industrial Exhibition Association, to 

 be held at Toronto, Sept. 9 to 13: 23 mastiffs, 52 St. Ber- 

 nards, 12 bloodhounds, 2 Newfoundlands, 24 great Danes, 

 5 Russian wolfhounds, 3 deerhounds, 16 foxhounds, 19 

 greyhounds, 16 pointers, 33 English setters, 22 Irish set- 

 ters, 19 Gordon setters, 40 collies, 5 bulldogs, 21 bull-ter- 

 riers, 5 whippets, 24 Irish terriers, 3 Dandy Dinmont ter- 

 riers, 10 Bedlington terriers, 5 Scotch terriers, 5 skye ter- 

 riers, 14 black and tan terriers, 2 poodles, 15 field spaniels, 

 7 Irish water spaniels, 79 cocker spaniels, 2 Clumber span- 

 iels, 9 dachshunds, 22 beagles, 58 smooth fox-terriers, 30 

 wire fox-terriers, 2 Yorkshire terriers, 4 toy terriers, 10 

 pugs, 10 toy spaniels, 1 Italian greyhound, 4 miscellaneous 

 class. 



Manitoba Trials. 



Morris, Man., Sept. 10.— Special to Forest and Stream. 

 Manitoba Club amateur stake finished to-day. Dodo first, 

 Bonnie Lib II. second, Columbus third, Harry Noble 

 fourth. Derby had nineteen starters. Weather pleasant. 



J. M. Freeman, of Bicknell, Ind., died Sept. 2. 



B. Waters. 



