226 Biological Controversy and its Laws. [April, 
the existence of free will, the power of overcoming natural 
instincts and temptations, in order to secure a supposed 
benefit in the sequel ; — ' “ A fine terrier, in the possession of 
a surgeon at Whitehaven, about three weeks ago exhibited 
its sagacity in a rather amusing manner, It came into the 
kitchen and began plucking the servant by the gown, and, 
in spite of repeated rebuffs, it perseveringly continued in its 
purpose. The mistress of the house, hearing the noise, 
came down to enquire the cause, when the animal treated 
her in a similar manner. Being struck with the concern 
evinced by the creature, she quietly followed it upstairs into 
a bed-room, whither it led her; there it commenced barking, 
looking under the bed, and then up in her face. Upon ex- 
amination, a cat was discovered there quietly demolishing a 
beef-steak, which it had feloniously obtained. The most 
singular feature in the whole case is that the cat had been 
introduced into the house only a short time before, and that 
bitter enmity prevailed between her and her canine com- 
panion.”* This is a capital case. “ Instindt ” would unde- 
niably have led the terrier to attack the cat and attempt to 
deprive her of her booty, the rather as the two animals were 
on unfriendly terms. But we find this natural impulse here 
completely restrained for the attainment of a certain definite 
end. The terrier lays an information against his enemy. 
Why should he, unless he entertained the notion that theft 
was wrong ? He evidently concluded that his enemy, if 
detected in such an adt, would probably suffer severe 
punishment. The incident is of the greater value as it 
prove that brutes are capable not merely of planning means 
to effedt an objedt quite unconnedted with the preservation 
of the individual or of the species, but of exercising self- 
control ; that, in short, they do not always blindly and 
necessarily follow their physical appetites, but can, like man, 
forego present indulgence for what appears to them a greater 
good hereafter. 
A strange attempt is made to show that animals are alto- 
gether unconscious ; that though they feel pain, they are 
not aware of so doing. They are represented as being, 
therefore, naturally and permanently in the state into which 
man may be artificially and temporarily thrown by means of 
anaesthetics. If this be, then cruelty to animals is an im- 
possibility, and the stipulation that in vivisedtion anaesthetics 
are to be employed is farcical in the extreme. But what of 
the evidence for this assumption ? We know that man can 
* Zoologist,” p. 2131. 
