THE MONTHLY 
JOURNAL OF SCIENCE. 
MAY, 1879. 
I. THE SPIRITUAL IN ANIMALS. 
‘jJg.ERTAIN writers, who have given up as untenable 
every other alleged ground of distinction between 
man and his “ poor relations,” take their final stand 
on the religious sentiment — on the recognition of a God and the 
belief in a future state : this, in their opinion, forms the final 
and insurmountable barrier. Before we can be expected to 
admit this assumed distinction it must be shown to our satis- 
faction, first, that all normal men are spontaneously wor- 
shippers ; and, secondly, that all other animals are incapable 
of religious emotions. All other animals, we repeat ; for if 
in any one species there can be found a trace of the “ God- 
idea,” then the boundary-line — whatever it may be worth — 
will run in an unwelcome direction, including that one 
species together with man, whilst excluding all the rest of 
the animal creation. Now where is the evidence that 
“ brutes ” are destitute of the religious sentiment ? Simply 
nowhere. Who will dare to say that he has analysed all 
the emotions that pass through the mind of every animal ? 
that he has looked upon the world with its eyes ? Who can 
even guarantee that none of the adtions of brutes have a 
religious significance ? If we reflect how strangely varied 
are the devotional rites even of our own species, should we 
not pause before authoritatively deciding what must be the 
worship of other beings ? The whole matter rests upon 
assumption. Man has complacently taken for granted that 
a “ mere brute ” must of necessity be without any trace of 
religion, and then, arguing in a circle, has elevated this 
imagined incapability of religion into a boundary-line be- 
tween man and “ mere brutes.” We cannot recognise the 
validity of such reasoning. Lord Herbert of Cherbury, 
VOL. ix. (n.s.) z 
