144 
PECULIAR ORGANIZATIONS. 
the end of it, and thus draws its prey within its mouth 
If this be not mechanism, what is? Should it be said, that, 
by continual endeavours to shoot out the tongue to the 
stretch, the woodpecker species may by degrees have 
lengthened the organ itself beyond that of other birds, 
what account can be given of its form, of its tip? How, in 
particular, did it get its barb, its dentation? These barbs, 
in my opinion, wherever they occur, are decisive proofs ol 
mechanical contrivance. 
III. I shall add one more example, for the sake of its 
novelty. It is always an agreeable discovery, when, having 
remarked in an animal an extraordinary structure, we come 
at length to find out an unexpected use for it. The follow¬ 
ing narrative, which Goldsmith has taken fromBuflon, fur¬ 
nishes an instance of this kind. The babyrouessa, or In¬ 
dian hog, a species of wild boar, found in the East Indies, 
has two bent teeth, more than half a yard long, growing 
upwards, and (which is the singularity) from the upper jaw. 
[PI. XXVII. fig. 4.] These instruments are not wanted 
for offence; that service being provided for by two tusks is¬ 
suing from the upper jaw, and resembling those of the com¬ 
mon boar; nor does the animal use them for defence. 
They might seem therefore to be both a superfluity and an 
encumbrance. But observe the event: the animal hitches 
one of these bent upper teeth upon the branch of a tree, and 
then suffers its whole body to swing from it. This is its 
manner of taking repose, and of consulting for its safety. 
It continues the whole night suspended by its tooth, both 
easy in its posture, and secure; being out of the reach of 
animals which hunt it for prey. # t 
* Goldsmith’s Natural History, vol. iii. p. 195. 
t There does not seem to be any sufficient authority for ascribing this 
use to the tusks of this animal. Indeed one does not readily see how it 
could in the way described swing itself clear of its enemies, except by first 
climbing the tree; which is not pretended. The fact is doubted, it is be¬ 
lieved, by many naturalists, and the opinion probably was in the first place 
founded upon mere conjecture. A modern and distinguished traveller has 
these remarks upon the subject. “ Philosophers had long puzzled them¬ 
selves in conjectures what the design of nature could be, as she does no¬ 
thing without design, in giving to this animal a pair of large, curved tusks, 
pointing inwards to the face in such a manner as made it sufficiently clear 
they could not be used either for attack or defence, for procuring food, or 
for assisting the mastication of it when procured. At length it occurred, 
or was discovered, by whom I do not recollect, that the animal is fond ot 
sleeping in a standing posture, and, that having a large, ponderous head, 
it finds a conveniency in hanging it upon the branch of a tree or shrub 
within the reach of its tusks, which serve on such occasions for hooks. 
This is at least an ingenious discovery, and may be true; but if so the 
