458 
is, that the action of animals is altogether automatic, but I cannot agree with 
this From my own observations it seems to me that those actions ar 
something more than automatic. Of course our great difficulty m discussing 
this question arises from our inability to look into the minds of animals 
But as we cannot do this, we are m the dark, and can on y ju g 
analogy. Now, many years ago, my brother and my brother-in-law went 
out to bathe; neither of them could swim well, but they got out of Jhem 
depth, and the dog of the latter, being on shore and seeing Ins mast 
danger, plunged in, and seizing him by the neck, rescued him ‘ 
think this can be regarded as an automatic action or as simply the result , ot p 
instinct* So far as my own experience goes, the d^culty of i supposi 
that the acts of animals are purely instinctive, arises from the fact that hey 
are capable of varying their operations in 
Take for instance the bee. You may say that in bmlc mg 
is purely instinctive, and I will not dispute it ; but what do you meanly 
instinct ? Mr. Morshead uses the phrase “natural sagacity which m very 
inconvenient, and which covers a great deal more ground ^ mstmck 
SuP po S e in a hive a piece of the comb falls down by some accide nt-in such 
f c r he bees modify the architecture of the comb to meet that circum- 
JtTce Now if you admit, as I am not indisposed to do, that the action of 
the bee is purely instinctive, still when you find- that the 
its architecture to the altered condition of circumstances, there is, I thu , 
something more than mere instinct involved in the matter. Again, take the 
case of birds’ nests. I know the general character of their nests, and 
know that they accommodate their architecture to circumstances. - 
tndlLd how it is possible to pronounce such e* pureiy — « 
automatic. I do not think everything can be referred to pure mrtmct 
instance a setter that I once had was a most notorious poacher, and the way 
“d "n his operations was this :-In the neighbourhood there was a 
sheep-dog with a cross of the greyhound ; hence he was a rapid rimne . 
Iwo Lnfals used to go out poaching together. The sheep-dog would mot go 
out by himself, but was induced to do so by the setter. \V hen the setter got 
his dinner, he used to fetch the sheep-dog, and after dividing his dinner 
with him, the two went out hunting together. I cannot understand tha 
such cases as this can well be accounted for on the principle of instinct 
alone in fact it seems to me that a great number of these animal actions 
are the result of principles analogous to those in man. I am not sure whether 
Mr Morshead wishes to put forward the view that the whole of the in- 
tellectual functions of man are simply instinctive also (several voices, No, no, , 
but it seems to me that much was laid down in that direction. Nobody 
will dispute that many of our intellectual actions are instinctive or automatic. 
* Such anecdotes show the lower animals to be possessed 
and intelligence, qualities without which they would not 
purpose of their creation. Bo. 
of both instinct 
have served the 
