Nov. 15, 1913- 
FOREST AND STREAM 
u±i 
Our Poor Relations of the Zoo 
T HE anthropoid apes, which include the 
chimpanzee, orang-outang, gorilla and 
gibbon, although different from each other 
in minor details of structure and disposition, are 
nevertheless remarkable for the striking re¬ 
semblance which thej’- bear to man in many im¬ 
portant respects. No intelligent observer can 
fail to notice in them such features as the forma¬ 
tion of their external ears, which are thoroughly 
human; the shape of the fingers and nails, the 
face and the body, the expression of the eyes, 
as well as of certain emotions, such as sur¬ 
prise, anger, fear, resentment, etc., without feel¬ 
ing that, surely these are no mere “lower ani¬ 
mals,” but animals with the clear impress of 
humanity, strangely, but distinctly, visible upon 
their anatomy; and, without having a feeling 
that if they are less than human they are cer¬ 
tainly more than monkey. 
So strong is this conviction, 'that it fre¬ 
quently provokes a sort of resentment, nay even 
anger, in the observer, who in spite of him¬ 
self, inwardly feels that he is face-to-face with 
actual poor relations which he is ashamed to 
own. Probably were it not for this feeling of 
wounded pride and vanity, the Darwinian theory 
would never have met with such bitter and vio¬ 
lent opposition as it did when first promul¬ 
gated by its epoch-making author; and thence 
the long fight against ignorance, passion and 
prejudice; until the facts of nature and its laws, 
marshalled by such generals as Charles Darwin, 
Thomas Henry Huxley, Ernest Haeckel, Herbert 
Spencer, A. R. Wallace, and a host of other great 
men of Science, won a signal victory over the 
forces of prejudice and medieval superstition; 
and established the principle of evolution on a 
thoroughly scientific and solid basis, so much so 
that it is doubtful whether there exists to-day 
a scientist of any standing, and who has a char¬ 
acter to lose, that would openly disavow his 
belief in the Darwinian theory. 
The few who still hold out against it are 
the exception that proves the rule. They are 
the stragglers in the wake of a defeated army, 
who keep on fighting after the surrender of the 
main body; being ignorant of the fact that the 
opposing side has gained a complete victory, 
and that the day has been lost. 
It ought to be borne in mind that, con¬ 
trary to the too frequent idea prevalent in the 
minds of the scientifically uninformed. Darwin 
did not say that man was descended from apes; 
what he did say was that man and the apes were 
descended from a common source; so that the 
apes are not our forefathers, but our cousins 
(no doubt many times removed). This may be 
something of a salve for the wounded pride of 
those who lay so much store by the idea of an 
aristocratic pedigree, but all the same they 
should remember that the further they go back 
the less comfort on this score they are likely 
to find in an investigation of the genealogical 
tree. If they really want to have a just basis 
for a pardonable pride, the only way to secure 
it is, individually to earn it themselves, and allow 
the bones of their forebears to rest in peace. 
It becomes us to remember that in our nature 
By W. G. BEECROFT 
we are certainly, at our best, a little lower than 
the angels; and to bear in mind Professor 
Huxley’s statement that “the most ordinary 
study of human nature reveals at its foundation 
all the selfish passions and fierce appetites of 
the merest quadrupeds.” 
Of course, it is always an ungracious task 
to remind ourselves of the seamy side of our 
being, as well as of our biological history; and 
we need not be surprised if in doing so we 
make enemies for ourselves because we speak 
the truth. It is, however, the opposite of wis¬ 
dom to dwell in a fool’s paradise, or to let 
others do so, in relation to the place we occupy, 
for better or worse, in nature. 
It appears to be the case that man is con¬ 
stituted so that he loves to pose as a “lord of 
creation,” and to make all his fellow-creatures 
his serfs. He suffers from an overweening self- 
ANY OLD APE MIGHT SING “HERE COMES MY 
DADDY NOW.” 
esteem and pride, and is so much inflated with 
his own importance that it is said to be danger¬ 
ous to tell him of his humble origin without at 
the same time reminding him of his greatness 
also. 
Darwin in the closing chapter of his 
“Descent of Man-,” says that notwithstanding 
man’s great achievements, and the sublime 
heights of progress and civilization to which 
he has, by his own unaided efforts attained, he 
should not forget that he, nevertheless, “carries 
in his body the indelible marks of his lowly 
origin.” 
For the purpose of comparison it is gener¬ 
ally admitted by scientists now, that the chim¬ 
panzee, of all the anthropoid apes, is the nearest 
approach to man, both in appearance, in bodily 
structure, and in mental capacity. He has the 
same 200 bones, the same 300 muscles, and the 
32 teeth, as man; and these teeth are set in the 
same order in their jaws—16 above and 16 below 
—made up of incisors, canines, premolars and 
molars. His body is covered with hair, but not 
very thickly; in fact, there are many men with 
quite as much hairy covering on their bodies. 
The chimpanzee’s skin is black just like the 
negro’s, both being native of the African 
jungles, and their pigmentation is probably due 
to the same cause—the climate. In like manner, 
the skin of the ourang-utang is colored simi¬ 
larly to the natives of Sumatra and Borneo, 
viz: a reddish-brown, which no doubt is due to 
similar local influences. It is very difficult to 
rear chimpanzees in a temperate climate, and 
when in captivity, consumption usually carries 
them off in a few years at most. Like men, the 
chimpanzee is devoid of a regular tail and ex¬ 
actly to the same extent; in both cases there are 
the remains of what was once an ancestral tail, 
consisting of five shriveled vertebrae constitut¬ 
ing what is called the coccyx; a continuation of 
the spinal column. 
Man is related in a more or less degree to 
all animals below him in the organic scale. He 
is the last term of a series of progressive stages 
of life development, starting from the unicellu¬ 
lar Protozoa of the Laurentian period. This 
is attested both by paleontology and embry¬ 
ology; the former showing the fossil remains of 
extinct forms in different stages of development, 
and the latter showing that the human embryo, 
during the period of gestation, epitomizes the 
whole history of the evolution of life on the 
earth, back to its beginning as a single-celled 
Protozoan. 
It is evident that a parting of the ways was 
at one time reached when, from a common stem, 
man and the ape parted company, each setting 
out on divergent lines of their own. It is a 
significant fact that a baby chimpanzee is much 
more human in appearance than an adult one, 
while on the other hand, a human baby is more 
like a chimpanzee than is an adult human being. 
This, it will be seen, has an important bearing 
on the comparative anatomy of man and the 
apes. 
It is a remarkable fact that in the course of 
its development the human embryo passes 
through what may be described as the simian 
stage, in its mother’s womb, anl this is some¬ 
times verified in poor countries during a severe 
famine, where children with very apelike features 
are sometimes born of half-starved mothers; 
these conditions no doubt acting so as to cause 
what is called arrested development during the 
ape-like stage of the embryo. 
It is quite true that the difference of cere¬ 
bral development is great, between the lowest 
type of humanity, such as the extinct aborigines 
of Tasmania, or the Veddas of Ceylon, and a 
Newton or a Shakespeare; but the difference 
between a chimpanzee and a low grade of the 
New World monkeys is equally great. Indeed 
it is greater, perhaps, that the hiatus that 
divides the lowest human being from the highest 
man-like ape. 
Those who fondly imagine that they are 
separate and distinct from all relationship to 
the other members of the Mammalian class are 
doomed to bitter disappointment; and they 
would do well to lay to heart the following 
pregnant words of the late Professor Huxley, in 
