XY. 
OX IXSTIXCT. 
By F. Maule Campbell, F.L.S., F.Z.S., F.B.M.S. 
Read at Hertford , 25 th April , 1884. 
The human mind is the only instrument we can employ to 
investigate analogically the actions of animals. There is, however, 
no reason why we should introduce into this enquiry any greater 
amount of such reasoning than is necessary. Ordinary language is 
sufficient to place us on our guard against this error. The female 
spider is considered to act “ paradoxically ” in devouring her 
consort ,* 4 because in doing so she conflicts with human sentiment. 
But her conduct is in accordance with what we ought to expect from 
a creature of non-gregarious habits which feeds mostly upon forms of 
life weaker than itself. A dog is called “ clever” if able to perform 
tricks which could be of no possible use to him in a wild state; 
while a high canine intelligence, suitable to his natural wants, is 
frequently left unascertained, or, if it be ascertained, is only valued 
so long as it administers either to the advantage or pleasure of 
humanity. The domestication of animals has entirely changed their 
habits and course in life. At one time they were chiefly occupied 
in obtaining food, while now their energies are diverted to rendering 
service to man, on whom their happiness is dependent. These new 
conditions are almost equal to a new phase of existence, even though 
man, in consulting his own convenience, has chosen for the change 
those most suitable to the animal. New habits and instincts have 
been developed, and we may be sure that some old ones have been 
weakened or lost. Having thus placed some animals in an artificial 
state, we apply artificial tests of intelligence not only to them but 
to others still enjoying freedom. The better plan is to draw our 
conclusions from adjustments which are related to an animal’s own 
habits, and which are due to its own observation. We are thus 
enabled to form some idea of its natural capacity. 
Intelligence differs from reason, not in kind but in degree; and the 
clearest evidence of its possession by animals lies in their profiting 
by experience. My dog, when quite a puppy, saw me put on a bee- 
veil, and followed me to my apiary. He was soon badly stung. 
Since that day he has discreetly retired whenever he has seen me 
in my bee-dress. On my return to the house he looks at me from 
head to foot, and should he see a bee withdraws to a respectful 
distance. He avoids a flying bee, but snaps at a blue-bottle, and 
thus shows a recognition of the difference between the two buzzes, 
forms of flight, or odours, and of the inference to be thence drawn. 
If he wants to enter a room, and the door is .shut, he will generally 
jump up at the handle. The direction of his eyes and the position 
of his paws will show plainly that his object is not merely to push 
* See my remarks on this subject in ‘ ‘ The Pairing of Tegemria Guyonii , Guer.” 
—‘ Journ. Linn. Soc ,’ Zool., vol. xvii, p. 162. 
