179 
correlative. And, granting this, he was asked to explain how, 
“ upon any principle of natural selection, this intellect came at 
all? We have only as yet the animal — something between 
the man and the gorilla ; but it could not speak nor think. 
From whence then did intellect and speech proceed ? ” — Now 
I beg your especial attention to all that Mr. Wallace could 
reply to such an essential question. He said : “ Mr. Reddie 
also wants to know how the intellect came at first. I don’t pre- 
tend to answer that question, because ive must go so long bach. 
If Mr. Reddie denies that any animal has intellect, it is a 
difficult question to answer; but if animals have intellect in 
different proportions, and if the human infant, the moment it 
is born, has not so much intellect as an animal, and if, as the 
infant grows, the intellect grows with it, I do not see the 
immense difficulty, if you grant the universal process of se- 
lection from lower to higher animals. If you throw aside 
altogether this process of selection, you need not make the 
objection about the intellect.” * Now, in the first place, 
there is anignoratio elenchi in this reply; for the objection has 
been urged expressly to enable us to test the theory (assuming 
its possibility) on a point in which we can test it ; and, besides, 
Mr. Wallace ought to have seen that he had also answered 
himself. It is his own proposition, that speech and intellect 
would go together ; and if that be so, then the inferior ani- 
mals have not the intellect, so defined, that goes with speech. 
But the difference between the intelligence of the dumb crea- 
tion and the intelligence of speaking man might well form the 
subject of further investigation, which might fitly be brought 
before this Society. No doubt the intellect of the child grows 
with its growth ; but then the child is the child of intelligent 
and speaking man; and let me ask, would its intellect grow even 
now as it does, if the child was not taught to speak ? The 
problem Mr. Wallace had to solve, and failed to solve, was how 
intellect and speech could come of themselves, to endow an 
animal whose progenitor had neither one nor other ? 
, Before I bid farewell to Darwinism, I must notice Mr. 
Wallace's reply to another pertinent objection raised in the 
Anthropological Society. He said : “ Dr. Hunt asserts that 
archaeology shows that the crania of the ancient races were 
the same as the modern. Well, that is a fact I quoted on my 
own side, and his quoting it against me only shows that you 
can twist a fact as you like. I quoted it as a proof that you 
mast go to an enormous distance of time, to bridge over the 
difference between the crania of the lower animals and man. 
* Anthropological Review , vol. II. p. clxxxiii. 
O 
