'Sept, 
1898.] 
FOREST AND STRE 
203 
reached up fh% the rear end of the wagon and pulled out 
one of the barrels, nbt waiting for the driver to roll it 
off. Yet another bear cattle Up to the tail gate of the 
wagon as the driver went back to roll, off a barrel of 
garbage, and as life stooped bve'r the, bear gave a nasty 
growl and made a pass ftt liirn With bne paw. This 
satisfied the young lady- Who Was Iboking for experi- 
ence, and she crawled out On ihte wagon tongue, as far 
away from the bear as she could get. Not so the driv- 
er, however, who was very much angered at this im- 
pertinence on the part of a mere bear. Reaching back 
into the wagon, he caught up a seat board that lay at 
-flvmd, and brought it down on the bear's nose with a 
:. sir-ash that nearly put the old fellow out for awhile. As 
•, the bear recovered some idea of what was going on, he 
; | vlkxi his freight, for the woods as fast as he could go, 
I UayiWg in tne most aggrieved tone of voice. There is 
1 nothing like teaching a silver tip his place. 
E. Hough, 
19200 Bqxc.e Building, Chicago, 111. 
./Animal Intelligence. 
Editor & n 'd SMifflm •' 
Your CL wiesytoi\dw{, Mr. E. P. Alexander, m Forest 
ano <?T»i-t H, fcily 23, g<iy<es us several columns of argu- 
ment Set t "The .Origin of Animal Instincts ' 
acteanaed, in [its main ieatures, is an old 
;tUlMCVl, 111 ;iio «wnwi ii_t..^«A v.^, 
its :.de_<ieptiy,e verbiage, it stands for a 
[by .a designer who not only 
The theory 
fixed aitd^ria 1 designer who not onb 
dSgns but Ssun ^ s ^ lete ^ utro1 ° f the . ^ ng ^ 
KSi' tI a " - - W m 'the lower annuals, and 
3S&*&£gZ££i was designed in 
who mai,tai„ , V^g%*T 83 
methods, the world over, in exp, W*$ Thev ac 
ridicule and misstate the ^iews Cu Sjg* *feJ*J 3 hdr 
cept no evidence unless it is indispi ^JeaS for na- 
opponents do not improvise and nan ,/erets 
ture, they shout "chance world." Th, ^» Se f be- 
lli nature to this class of writers. The V &*B t £ Sf e 
ing self made, who created all things, *££ fJUd 
greatest sangfroid give this imaginary ere. 
iloquent title, and then call on their oppone fe te mM 
:a superior being or forever remain silent. MH f H5P . 
They make use of a mass of verbiage that *HKI 
■and dismays the untrained mind. Their bald ass \~„ed 
•are something wonderful, and their similes are tru Ifth. 
up fakes. Their arguments are illogical, conflicting \ 
the knowledge acquired through our senses. * 
Your correspondent easily belongs to this class o» 
writers. He adopts all the tricks known to the brother- 
hood. He laughs to scorn the accounts in Forest and 
Stream of animal intelligence and communication, He 
holds Mr. Mather's opinions up to redicule, and mis- 
states his theory of inherited caution. He contradicts 
his own theory in numerous instances. He makes reck- 
less assertions— assertions that cannot stand in the 
light of reason. Referring to Darwin, he makes pre- 
tensions that are glaringly false. Finally he conjures up 
a being that he nicknames "sub-ego" and calls Tjpon us 
to accept this mythical being if we cannot produce a 
superior. 
He is guilty of a contemptible trick when he substitutes 
me word chance for evolution. He knows, or should 
know, that no reputable writer on nature ever used the 
word chance. Chance has no place in nature. Chance 
is something that happens without a cause. Nature has 
a cause for everything that happens. In an argument 
containing over 3,000 words, not once is the word evolu- 
tion used, chance is substituted. Do we know the 
meaning of this trick? Certainly. It means that the writer 
tries to convey the impression that those opposed to 
his theory believe in a chance creation, a chance world. 
It is the only thing that would make his theorv respect- 
able. 
_ He poses as Darwin's defender. Would have us be- 
lieve that he is a disciple of Darwin, while there is not 
■an idea in common between them. He believes in a 
special creation. Darwin believed in evolution. He 
believes that all variations in nature were designed from 
the first. Darwin believed that selection and environ- 
ment produced variations. Darwin claimed that acquired 
characters were transmitted. Your correspondent be- 
lieves the contrary. He cannot palm himself onto us as 
a Darwinian. We bar wolves in sheep's clothing. 
To show what kind of a theory this writer advances I 
will quote his recapitulation: 
"To recapitulate. Individual acquirements are not 
transmitted to posterity. Chance could no more produce 
the creation we see than the newspapers we read. Prac- 
tically a blue print of every species preceded its first 
appearance. A sub-ego precedes every ego, superintends 
its entire life, and imparts all necessary race instincts, and' 
finally there is m some manner the equivalent of tele- 
pathic communication between sub-egos of the same- 
species." 
It will be noticed that the word chance is here sub- 
stituted for evolution, as it is throughout the article, and 
the word is used seventeen times. If he had used the 
word evolution, his argument would have excited derisiom 
only. 
Vo, ir correspondent seems to be somewhat mixed in 
Relation to his imaginary beings, lie starts out with the 
claim that nature was created and is controlled by a 
power which he calls "the centrifugal force of nature." But 
afterward he seems to substitute "sub-ego." There ap- 
pears to be a multiplicity of "sub-egoes," as every "ego" 
has one. It is just possible that he may claim a "centri- 
fugal force" and ^'sub-egos" also. If so, I do not know 
why, for he gives the two forces the same powers. I 
can quote from his paper to prove this, but it is not 
worth while, as I shall deal mostly with his "sub-egos." 
Let us see what Mr. Mather advanced that roused our 
sleeping lion to action. He says: "An old trout often 
pricked learns caution and transmits that quality to its. 
progeny. The heedless young trout takes the first lurev 
and has no progeny to transmit its rashness to." Again:: 
"There is no instinct in it: it is reason pure and simple.. 
The wounded that survived learned a lesson and trans- 
r ---ted it to their posterity." 
Right here I want to thank Mr. Mather for the senti- 
ments expressed in these quotations. They embody the 
views of the best scientific writers of the present day. 
He grants reason to the lower animals, and so does 
every thinking mind that studies them. 
Your correspondent makes light of Mr. Mather's con- 
servative statement. He claims that Mr. Mather's theory 
should cause a duck to transmit the knowledge of a 
wooden duck, and a trout the knowledge of the identi- 
cal hook by which it was pricked, maker's name also, I 
suppose. Thus do such writers ridicule and belittle the 
opinions of their opponents. 
When I first came to Cape Ann, I wondered much 
at the Wariness of the robins, but I soon found a reason. 
They were persecuted by gunners. In Maine, where I 
had lived, the robins were very tame. If I approached 
a nest the young birds would call to me with open 
bills. I could, stroke them, and they were apparently 
without fear. Here if I approach a nest and the birds 
are not large enough to fly, they crouch to the bottom 
in silent terror. Time and again I have had them break 
in terror from the nest. These young birds know nothing 
of the gunner. How do they come by their wildness if 
they do not inherit it? 
Now here comes your correspondent and explains 
everything by his beautiful theory of "sub-ego." How 
simple it is. Each young robin is attended by a "sub- 
ego" that lookB after its welfare. When I approach a 
nest the alert "sub-egos" jump on the young robins and 
jam them down to the bottom of the nest. Or, if they 
are about ready to fly, the "subs" yank them out of the 
nest and kick them under the bushes out of sight. 
Shake, Mr. Mather, we are enlightened! 
Your correspondent tries to fit two opposing ideas 
into one theory. A creation by evolution and a fixed 
creation. He knows that the readers of Forest and 
Stream are aware that endless variety and new forms 
are features of nature, so he explains that to his force, or 
being, we owe all the natural forms in nature. He says 
of this force: 
"If a simple access of wariness and caution is not 
enough, a new sense or a new organ are not beyond its 
powers." Notwithstanding this plain statement, in line 
with evolution, he coolly proceeds to advocate an oppo- 
site theory, which he calls a "blue print theory." This 
theory he illustrates by selecting the venomous serpent, 
sta^ng that one illustration is as good as a hundred. He 
claims that the venomous serpent is not the result of 
th£ variations of the serpent type. "There must have 
been a Um print of him before there was a venomous 
serpent." 
How inconsistent. In his first proposition a species 
can be changed by a "new sense or a new organ." In 
his second proposition species are fixed, immovable, a 
'"b'ue print" must precede each individual. 
VoC r epfi¥&G0ndent can only be classed with the 
V «" g&iflJ that the differences in nature came 
wn ei • ^ - 0 /in^-tormed, They claim a special creation 
into ^y ^p"] ^ being, who ifi self-created. To main- 
by an Jm emge . fl ^ st rea son to the lower ani- 
tain thib 11 .theory tu 1 | evolution, and that acquired 
mals, 1 be>" must ^ j { - t ^ ey should accept inherit- 
characters arfc mherite. ^ £yp}ution. If you prove to 
ance, they coil, d not dei. V( ^ fl g equ ired characters are 
this class ot writers that ce. • ^ ^gt of Weismann, to 
hereditary, tl'te answer would „ were hereditary they 
the effect tha t if jhe characters Through such loop- 
could not be a cquirt'd characters. -<-§. 
holes do these waiters escape from fac. -^fldgnt, to show 
I quote once m'pre fr.om your corres t 
the weakness of hi 's argu/nent: ^ding ttnd 
"I am not denying the value of cross-b. •^pljient 
selection in produci ng the xiighest possible de\ • ' , nra f 
of all natural instinct:?,, abilitit a or powers, or any . 
variations of any pbys ical form ■ 
No, he does hot den y these phenomena in nature, si. V 
ply because he knows that they are well known to the* 
readers of Forest ani5 Stream, but he gives his case 
awav when he accepts f.hem. Select ion and cross-breed- 
ing are for the purpose of transmitting desirable char- 
acters, and prove the theory of heredity, and also 
prove that evolution is ai demonstrable fact. 
I saw to-day proof of an inherited character in a 
cat. The cat had two extra toes on each foot. These 
cats with double feet are not unr.ommon m Gloucester. 
The double feet are transmitted to some of the off- 
spring when either a male or fei.xiale is mated with a 
common cat. 
Mr. Alexander has placed his thee «y before the^ wrong 
class of readers. The readers of F 'orest and Stream 
are no dime novel lunatics. They are in close touch 
with nature, and they know that evo. Hition is a reason- 
able theory. They know that the k *wer animals can 
reason, and that they can communicate with each other. 
They are led to these conclusions by tl W- actions of the 
lower animals, which are capable of no other explana- 
tion. , . 
If men are told that the Brooklyn Bi "afee is y.nsafe, 
and they take some other route to esca (danger, jye 
say that they are guided by reason 
If birds, in migration, fly outside to esca ;fhe danger 
from the gunner, why not grant reason to (fee birds? 
When we are among foreigners, by thei r actions we 
know that they can communicate with eac li other, al- 
though we cannot understand a word. Why ' should we 
deny to animals the same power, when their act i° ns are 
equally as suggestive? 
If ( one was inclined to adopt Mr. Alexan tier's "sub- 
ego" theory, and possessed a logical mind, he would 
want a creator for "sub-ego," which he coul d call suD " 
sub-ego, and yet another which he could ca 31 sub- sub- 
sub-ego, and so on, one being aboA'e anoth er untij ' ne 
either landed in the grave or a lunatic asylum. 
Back of the germ of life, with all its possibi lities,. ffM re 
is a mystery which we cannot solve, and .may nwv r 
solve. It is useless for Mr. Alexander to solve tfo\ * 
mystery for us with a being who oroceeds to create Mm- 
self and then to create nature. 
•;. Hermit • 
Gloucester, Aug. 12. 
The Forest and Stream is put to pr&ss each week on Tuesday."- 
Correspondence intended for publication should reach us at''tHe't 
latest by Monday, and as much earlier as practicable. 
Through Texas Blackjacks. 
The professor wanted a kangaroo rat and he invited 
me to spend a few days with him, and we would drive 
together to the ranch of a friend of his in the blackjack 
country below San Antonio alid try to get one. I may 
as well say at once that we failed as far as the main ob-- 
ject of the expedition was concerned, but we saw so 
many forms of animal and plant life that were new to 
me that I fotftid the trip exceedingly interesting, and 
hope that a short account of it may prove so to others, 
who, like, myself, may be fond of natural history. 
On the' morning after my arrival at the professor's 
house, while he was busy getting the buckboard and 
pony ready for the journey, I sat on the gallery and 
smoked my pipe, and watched the cactus wrens hopping 
about in the Bermuda grass collecting materials for 
nest-building. 
A wren about the size of a mockingbird was some 
thing quite new to me, and as they were very tame and 
came within a few yards of the gallery I was able to get 
a good view of them. There were two or three of their 
bulky, domed nests in sight, and they were very con- 
spicuous in the thin, feathery foliage of the mesquite trees, 
but none of them had eggs in them, and the professor 
said that each pair of birds made several nests without 
laying in them, and in fact they were such industrious 
architects that the whole season through they could be 
seen just as they were that morning, hopping about the 
garden with bits of grass in their beaks. 
I was still watching the wrens when the professor 
shouted that the buckboard was ready, and in a few mo- 
ments we were rattling along between the mesquite trees 
on our way to the Medina River. 
There had been a rain a few days before, so the road 
was not as dusty as usual and the day not unpleasantly 
warm. Mockingbirds were singing by the hundred, and 
Cassin's sparrow was warbling its quaint little song, 
Birds' songs as a rule are somewhat alike; almost every 
bird reminds one of some other in some of its notes, but 
Cassin's sparrow is an original; at least I have never 
heard any song that resembles in the least its cheery 
little ditty. 
The first part of our road lay through a level mesquite 
country that used years ago to be bare prairie. A mile 
or so to our left a dark line of live oaks and other tall 
timber showed the course of the San Antonio River. The 
track was fenced with barbed wire an each side, and 
there were not many houses near the road, as they are 
built further back, by the river, to be near water. The 
mesquite country is a stock country, purely and simply, 
and farming it is of little use without irrigation. After 
a while, however, the mesquite trees become fewer and 
the chaparral thicker, and here and there we passud 
houses and fields, the houses often surrounded by 
retama trees ablaze with golden blossoms. Huge clumps 
of prickly pear in full bloom made gorgeous patches 
oficolor. At my ranch, about 100 miles to the north- 
west, the "pear" blossom is always yellow, but here it 
was just as often a brilliant scarlet. 
The so-called chaparral is composed of a number of 
dwarf stunted shrubs, mostly covered with thorns, such 
as catclaw, dwarf hackberry, brazilwood or black chap- 
arral and lippia or white chaparral, whose feathery 
blooms supply the bees with splendid honey— a yellow- 
headed tit;s nest that we found by the roadside was 
lined almost entirely with these soft blooms. Here and 
there a Wisatch tree rises above the brushwood, and in 
one of these we saw the new nest of a pair of Bullock's 
orioles hanging within a foot or two of the dark, dis- 
fjplpred nest of last year. " , „ , , , .... 
Ampng 'the chaparral, besides the yellow-headed tits, 
we saw the T ex as cardinal, distinguished from his cousin, 
the common cardinal, by his thick, light-colored beak, 
ion" slim crest and claret-stained breast, and also the 
* -ved billed thrasher, locally known as Mexican mock- 
clu >d- his song is very like' that of the common mocker 
ingbu '„ con desceneds to sing his own SOflg, but as we 
when hv ven swee ter and mellower. 
tl hought e. q open S pace, quite close to the road, lay 
A T n a smai. ^ ea d horse — by no means an uncommon 
the > )d y a , - of a Texas highway— it had not been 
sight b y t}l£ slflu . -key buzzard and a caracara or Mex- 
long dt'ad, but a tuu ^ y [ oun d it, and having mada a 
ican buzzard ha4 alrea.. M - e wa iting about for the rest 
light lunch of its eyes Wt. t ^ ese birds are so similar 
.of it to get' tender. Though nre by no means alike 
iin their repulsive habits,, they v. - n dsome fellow, Avith 
.otherwise the caracara beriing 3 hi*. ' ar k mantle, while 
ihis black cap, yellowish cheeks and a. mainly looking 
ithe turkey buzzard is just exactly the m»u " course only 
Mvretch that he naturally ought tfrBj; $m ot t <tf 
when .he as <W the ground; one ha* a OTt re, d 
•him When he fc soaring about overhead, wi# that v 
tiS^Sght Of his that apparently takes him . where> « 
le wSies 0 go, .down wind or against it, without 8fl* 
he wishes .to - pt per haps an effort of Wl\h 
Qt SStSS^^S ofthe tall timber that fringe, 
MeSna and the professor pointed out the neat brick 
^i. ,,.^ French friend of his on the rising ground 
^T^S^^&k^^ we would stop , for dmn T 
^across the rawer, . { - r the long woo d- 
' § TT P w;"5tkf hrough the little village on the 
j v .a wiIpH as many as 200 in one week last year. 
nine y ^M^Vd ( thSe ?s nothing neater than that) 
neat as a b ackbird ^ a n Arab, and decided 
^^^mj^^f^i th e night at his 
to go with us atter J™ner 1 ff where we 
n^arSfcactuf wasAe neJ of a Mexican mocking- 
