217 
1876.] Biological Controversy and its Laws. 
What, then, of reason ? Is it the exclusive attribute of 
man ? Here, again, we have on our side the suffrages of 
men perfectly free from the least trace of Darwinian views, 
Cicero ascribes to the ant— Mens, ratio et memoria.” 
Milton, a man familiar with metaphysical and scholastic 
subtleties, makes one of his angels say concerning the 
lower animals — ■ 
“ They also reason, not contemptibly.” 
The orthodox Cuvier, antagonistic as he was to Evolu- 
tionism in every guise, speaking of brutes, declares — Leur 
intelligence execute des operations du meme genre.” 
Agassiz holds that we cannot draw any definite boundary 
between the faculties of a young child and those of a baby- 
chimpanzee. 
We are told, indeed, that were animals rational they 
would be capable of using language which we could under- 
stand. This by no means follows. To us it seems more 
than merely probable that a great difference in the degree of 
the mental faculties on either side may be quite sufficient to 
account for the imperfect understanding that prevails be- 
tween brutes and ourselves. Perhaps beings as much supe- 
rior to us as we are to Acari may be at this very moment 
rejecting our claims to reason as flatly as Mr. Mivart rejects 
those of “ our poor relations.” 
An attempt is also made to show that if working natural- 
ists consider animals to be rational, it is because they do 
not know what reason is. They ought, forsooth, to study 
metaphysics, and then might rise to a belief in the great 
gulf ! This suggestion reminds us of the fox, in the fable, 
who had lost his tail in a trap, and who promised great ad- 
vantages to his companions if they likewise would submit 
to amputation. Of course if we allow Mr. Mivart to frame 
a definition of reason to suit his own objects, the result may 
be foreseen. We hold that “ reason,” like “ life ” or like 
“ poison,” may be much more usefully illustrated than de- 
fined. We find animals arriving at results similar in nature, 
though of a lower degree, than what we attain ourselves. 
We conclude, therefore, that they reach these results not by 
the aid of a totally different faculty, gratuitously assumed 
for the occasion, but by a lower grade of the power which 
we acknowledge in ourselves. Brutes can, as we see, trace 
effects to their causes ; they can devise means to an end 
under circumstances which forbid recourse to the usual ex- 
planation of instinfit ; they can invent ; can be struck with 
an inward suggestion, can try its feasibility, and put it into 
