Bristol news. [volume] (Bristol, Va. & Tenn.) 1867-189?, 1870-07-29
Scientific.
IS MAN A FEEBLE AsIMlLs
[coNTINuED FROM LAST WEEK. ]

IRON tho London Spectator.
CONTINUED FROM LAST WEEK.
Then 1t Is argued that the extreme
length of the period of childhood in
man must have greatly cnfeebled him
in the struggle, and no doubt the length
of that period is one of the most curl
Gus of many distinctions between man
aud all other mammals. He is not
the longest-lived of them, but he takes
much the longest time to grow. But
in practice, we imagine, conceiving rs
far as one can the position of the hui
man being without intellect, the effect
of that sort of weakness would only
he this-that the females whole work
in a natural state would be the care of
her young, a necessity not imposed on
any other animal, aud accompanied
apparently by this popularity, that in
man almost alOno-not quite alone-is
the female decidedly the inferior of
the male in strength and courage. We
suppose our friends of the women's
rights movement will allow that, even
Though they may think the inequality
durable but at all events, that is found
to be the fact in all extremely savage
races, with the possible, and only pos
sible, exception of Il single negro clan.
1t would almost seem, therefore, as if
this kind of weakness had been met
by provision which covn.eractcd il
at the cost of n certain diminution OF
the defensive power, the female being
comparatively useless in combat,
diminution, however, truo of Mt least
one other species which has lived-the
stag. Tho similar weakness mt the
other extremity of life is not ! ocular
to man, and would make but little diff
ference in the struggle, being cquiva-
lent, in fact, ut the worst, to Il univer-
sal deduction from natura, longevity.
The human race would die at fifty in
stead of seventy, ard would even then
| be among the lOngcst-livcd of the
mammalia. The want of clothes or of
| fitting food, which seems To Il e civil
| lied writer 80 dreadful, is apparently
no reason for extinction. An inn
| mcnsciy large section of humanity,
probably clear haif, does not wear
| clothes In any way conducive either to
| health or protection. The Waist-clOth
of the Indian peasant is assumed from
motives OF dccency, not OF hyginc /;
| the naked castles, faquirs, muhunts,
etc, do not suffer in health; and the
/ ~
| by many Observers to be exceptional
~ long-lived. Two races at least, the
rasmanians and the Fuegians, face
severe cold without clothes, and it
must not be forgotten that in tropical
| climates cold seems TO strike rs
severely ms in the temperate zone.
The fall in the thermometer is COM
paraaively ms great and the suffering
as acute. The question of food Is mole
puZzling, but is not quite insuperable.
Half the difficulty would disappear il
man had no disgusts, which as an AN
imal he would not have. If we sup
pose him remaining in the mild eli
mates as long ~ he could, he would
have fish, aud the flesh of small ami
mails and birds, and berries and fruit
and some leaves, and may be credited
with instinct equal to that of the dor
mouse, which lays in stock against
bad weather. That he could multiply
enormously under such conditions il
of of course not possible; but then il
Is not thick population, but n popu'
lation which science desire9 to prove
it would not, ii must be remembered
on this hypothesis, diminished by dis
case any more than any animal popu
lation: IL might not be seriously men
aced by attack, for there are whole re
gions, like Australia, without wild an
imnls, which-as We may SEQ by thu
example of Palestine-do not multiply
merely because OF the absence of men
and IL would not be thinned off mucl
by war. War is said to DO natura
state, but if we are to suppose mel
: merely a'gregarious animal, we mus
assign him tho instincts of his kind
among which war in any true sense o
that word cannot be counted. a hOrsi
, will fight n horse, but he does not at
r tack him persistently because he Is 1
: horse and the only animal believed
to make war on human principles
, that is, in combination and for terrific
. nv, the dog of Constantinoplc and Al
eNanlria, leaves Off the moment hi
, adversary quits the special dominion
! he has invaded.
We rather doubt If mans weakness
rs an animal is sound arr umen
against development, and we do no
see that il Is needed. 1t is far easie
{ and more satisfactory to fight the bat
e tic upon higher ground, and call fo
A evidence to explain upon any materi
+ alist theory the unique position of ma
l. as the only being with accountability
!. intelligence. Where and when, II II
), ever was an animal, did he part CON
q pany with his kind? as IL is acknow
: edrsd by all observers that he Ia
o parted company and why is there II
trace of any other animal who Ina
made similar advance, il not in do
!. gree, then at least in kind? The tru
= argument against the developmer
II theory is not the impossibility of I'll
C development of IA hand, but the tot'
a want of evidence for the deyelopmeI
, of mind-the admitted existence
: chasm between the lowest saVas
y and the highest brute which even u
&c imagination Is unable TO cross.