ANIMAL. 
7*4 
retires within its fhell. If a fly perch upon one of its 
flower-leaves, it clofes inftantly, and crufhes the infed 
to death ! 
Plants in general, when forced from their natural pofi- 
tion, are endowed with a power to refiore themfelves. A 
hop-plant, twifting round a flick, directs its courfe from 
fouth to w-efl, as the fun does. Untwifl it, and tie it in 
the oppofite diredion, it dies. Leave it loofe in the wrong 
direction, it recovers its natural direction in a (ingle night. 
Twift a branch of a tree, fo as to invert its leaves ; if left 
in any degree loofe, it untwifis itfelf gradually, till the 
leaves be reftored to their natural pofition. What better 
can an animal do for its welfare ? A root of a tree, meeting 
with a ditch in its progrefs, is laid open to the air. What 
follows? It alters its courfe like a rational being, dips in¬ 
to the ground, undermines the ditch, rifes on the oppo’flte 
fide to its wonted diflance from the furface, and then pro¬ 
ceeds in its original diredion. Place a wet fponge near a 
root laid open to the air, the root will direct its courfe to 
the fponge. Change the place of the fponge, the root 
varies its direction. Thru ft a pole, into tire ground at a 
moderate diflance from a fcandent plant, the plant directs 
its courle to the pole, lays hold of it, and rifes on to its 
natural height. A honeyfuckle proceeds in its courfe till 
it be too long for fupporting its weight, and then ftrength- 
ens itfelf by (hooting into a fpiral. If it meets with ano¬ 
ther plant of the fame kind, they coalefce for mutual fup- 
port; the one ferewing to the right, the other to the leit. 
If a honeyfuckle twig meets with a dead branch, it ferews 
from the right to the left. The clafpers of briony fhoot 
into a fpiral, and lay hold of whatever comes in their way 
for fupport. If, after completing a fpiral of three rounds, 
they meet with nothing, they try again for further fupport 
by altering their courfe. 
M. Buffon, who appears almoft to confound the animal 
and vegetable kingdom's, denies fenfation to be any effen- 
tial diftinclion. “ Senl'ation,” fays he, “ more elfentially 
diflinguifties animals from vegetables : but fenfation is a 
complex idea, and requires fome explication. For, if fen¬ 
fation implied no more than motion confequent upon a 
firoke or an impulfe, the fenfitive-plant enjoys this power. 
But if, by fenfation, we mean the faculty of perceiving 
and comparing ideas, it is uncertain whether brute animals 
are endowed with it. If it fliould be allowed to dogs, ele¬ 
phants, &c. whofe adions feem to proceed from motives 
flmilar to thole by which men are aduated, it niuft be 
denied to many fpecies of animals, particularly to thofe 
which appear not to poffefs the faculty of progreffive mo¬ 
tion. If the fenfation of an oyfter, for example, differed 
only in degree from that of a dog, why do we not aferibe 
the fame fenfation to vegetables, though in a degree ftill 
inferior? This diftindion, therefore, between the animal 
and vegetable, is neither fufficiently general nor determi¬ 
ned. From this inveftigation, we are led to conclude, that 
there is no abfolute and eflential diftindion between the 
animal and vegetable kingdoms; but that nature proceeds, 
by imperceptible degrees, from the nioft perfed to the 
moll impeded animal, and from that to the vegetables; 
and the freffi-water polypus may be regarded as the laft of 
animals and the firft of plants. 
It were to be wiffied, that philofophers would on fome 
occafions confider, that a fubjed may be dark as well on 
account of their inability to lee, as when it really affords 
no light. This great author boldly concludes, that there 
is no eflential difference between a plant and an animal; 
becaufe we aferibe fenfation to an oyfter, and none to the 
fenfitive-plant: but we ought to remember, that, though 
we cannot perceive a diftindion, it may neverlhelefs exift. 
Before M. Buffon, therefore, had concluded in this man¬ 
ner, he ought to have proved that forhe vegetables were 
endowed with ferjation. 
It is no doubt, however, as much incumbent on thofe 
who take the contrary fide of tire queftion, to prove that 
vegetables are not endowed with fenfation, as it was in¬ 
cumbent on M. Buifon to have proved that they are. But 
a little attention will fliew us, that the difficulty here pro¬ 
ceeds entirely from our inability to fee the principle of 
fenfation. We perceive this principle in ourfelves, but no 
man can perceive it in another. Why then does every in¬ 
dividual of mankind conclude, that his neighbour has the 
fame fenfations with himfelf ? It can only be from ana¬ 
logy. Every man perceives Iris neighbour formed in a 
manner flmilar to himfelf; he ads in a fimilar manner on 
flmilar occafions, &c. Juft fo it is with brute animals. It 
is no more doubtful that they have fenfations, than that 
we have them ourfelves. If a man is wounded with a 
knife, for inftance, lie expreffes a fenfe of pain, and en¬ 
deavours to avoid u repetition of the injury. Wound a dog 
in tiie fame manner, he will alio exprel's a fenfe of pain ; 
and, if you offer to ftrike him again, will endeavour to 
efcape, before he feels the ftroke. To conclude here, that 
the adion of the clog proceeded from a principle different 
from that of the man, would be abfurd and unphilofophi- 
cal to the laft degree. 
We muft farther take notice, that there are fenfations 
effentially diftind from one another; and, in proportion 
as an animal is endowed with more or fewer of thefe dif¬ 
ferent fpecies, it is more or lefs perfed as an animal; but, 
as long as only one of them reipains, it makes not the leaft 
approach to the vegetable kingdom ; and, when they are 
all taken away, is fo far from becoming a vegetable, that 
it is only a mafs of dead matter. The fenfes of a perfed 
animal, for inftance, are five in number. Take away one 
of them, fuppofe fight, he becomes then a lefs perfed 
animal; but is as unlike a vegetable as before. Suppole 
him next deprived of hearing, his refemblance to a vege¬ 
table would be as little as before ; becaufe a vegetable can 
neither feel, tafte, nor fmell; and we fuppofe him ftill to 
enjoy thofe three fenfes. Let us, laltly, fuppofe him endow,, 
ed only with the fenfe of feeling, which, however, feems to 
include that of tafte, and he is no more a vegetable than 
formerly, but only an impeded animal. If this fenfe is 
then taken away, we conned him not with the vegetable 
kingdom, but with what M. Buffon calls brute-matter. It 
is to this kingdom, and not to the vegetable, that animals 
plainly approximate as they defeend. Indeed, to fuppofe 
an approximation between the vegetable and animal king¬ 
doms, is very abfurd ; for, at that rate, the mod imper- 
fed animal ought to be the nioft perfed plant ; but we 
obferve no fuch thing. All animals, from the higheft to 
the lowed:, are pofiefled of vegetable life ; and that, as far 
as we can perceive, in an equal degree, whether the animal 
life is perfed or impeded : nor doth there feem to be the 
fmalleft connedion between the higheft degree of vegeta¬ 
tion and the lowed degree of fenfa,tion. Though all ani¬ 
mals are poffeffed of vegetable life, thefe two feem to be 
as perfedly diftind and incommenfurate to one another, as 
any two things we can pollibly imagine. 
The power of vegetation, for inftance, is as perfed in 
an onion or leek, as in a dog, an elephant, or a man; and 
yet, though you threaten a leek or an onion ever fo much, 
it pays no regard to your words, as a dog would do ; nor, 
though you wound it, does it avoid a lecond ftroke. It 
is this principle of felf-prefervation in all animals, which, 
being the moft powerful one in their nature, is generally 
taken, and with very good reafon, as the true charaderiftic 
of animal life. This principle is undoubtedly a confe- 
quen.ee of fenfation ; and, as it is never obferved to take 
place in vegetables, we have a right to fay that the foun¬ 
dation of it, namely, fenfation, belongs not to them. There 
is no animal, which makes any motion in confequence of 
external impulfe where danger is threatened, but what 
puts itfelf in a pofture of defence ; but no vegetable what¬ 
ever does fo. A mufcle, when it is touched, immediately 
ffiuts its fhell ; and, as this adion puts it in a ftate of de¬ 
fence, we conclude that it proceeded from the principle 
of felf-prefervation. When the fenfitive-plant contrads 
from a touch, it is no more in a ftate of defence than be¬ 
fore ; for whatever would have deftroyed it in its expand¬ 
ed ftate will alfo do it in its coutraded ftate. The mo¬ 
tion 
