The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1880-05-20
Professor Huxley ON Dogs.

given to the illustration by the skeleton
of the animal being raised on hind legs,
that in internal construction the only
difference between man and dog was
one of size and proportion. There was
not bone in one which did not exist
in the other a single constituent in
the one that was not to be found in the
other. In the case of the dog there was
not that which, on superficial examine
ton, answered to the collar bone of
the man; but close dissection would
disclose in the case of the lower ami.
NAL little bone varying in length from
a third to half an inch, OCCUPYING the
same place as the human collar bone.
which was Individually rudlmentary
collar-bone. 1t appeared to be of no
functional importance, but there it was.
Considering the psychological nature
of the dog, the lecturer remarked that
he might be met at the outset with the
objection, Talk of the mind of dog;
why. don't believe he has a mind"
Well, the only reason he had for as
Stunning that the dog had q mind was
the same reason by which he assumed
that all present had minds. There was
no direct evidence of the fact any more
in the one than in the other.
Run a pin into man, and there
was start and a cry, by which
they came to the conclusion that pain
had resulted. Run a pin into dog, and
there was howl and attempt, perhaps
to bite, by which we inferred that the
animal was in state of consciousness
in which it also suffered pain. Could
they say chat the dog was mere piece
of animate machinery? It was quite
true that certain philosophers had held
views of that kind, but common sense
people would not have it, and he be-
lieved the common sense people were
right. At the same time he was dis
posed to think that in dogs the feeling
of pain was infinitely duller than in hui
man beings. As to the other senses be-
longing to dogs, he was inclined to
doubt very much if dogs could see with
anything like the distinctness of man.
Their hearing was indisputably very
acute; but it was a remarkable fact that
that sense was regulated on totally
different scale in dogs as compared with
human beings. Did they ever hear of
q dog taking pleasure in music? On
the contrary, the sounds of music
seemed to cause him acute pain, accom-
panied by horrible sort of fascination,
which fastened him to the spot at which
he was subjected to the torture. Else,
when q German band was doing its
worst in the streets, why did he sit up
on his launches and howl when he
might get up and run awayP Yet he
often wondered whether dogs really
did suffer pain from music or whether
they howled purely in sympathy, as
did the jackals of the prairies.
The sense of smell in q dog, was
something neutrality-suspicious. not
only for its delicacy, but for the fact
that its discrimination of what was
agreeable and disagreeable was exactly
the reverse of ours. They never heard
of dog being infatuated with lavender
water, or patchouli, or Eau de Cologne;
he rather reveled in the smells which
to men were a source Of unfeigned hor-
ror and disgust. He once possessed
dog which he frequently left amongst
the thousands frequenting Regents
Park. to secrete himself behind tree.
So soon as the animalfound that he had
lost his master he laid his nose to the
ground, and in that manner very soon
tracked him to his hiding-place. That
showed that the dog had the power Of
distinguishing the particular modifica-
ton Of the leather of the boots caused
by the wearing of his master, in contra
distinction to the notifications pro-
duced by hundreds Of thousands Of 9th
or people present at the moment.
As to the ability Of dogs to find their
way from place to place, he believed
there was an unconscious registration
in their minds Of the visual pictures
presented to them in the various tracks
through which they passed, and that
the memory worked backward until the
animal reached its destination. No one
could doubt the moral disposition OF
dogs. Some were Trustworthy, others
moro or less thieves; some were anna
bic, others vicious, and 90 on. Neither
Was there any doubt that = dog had
ideas Of equality and inequality. They
could easily settle that point BY offer.
ing . dog : large and . small piece Of
mSat on the Same dish, and by obsorv-
inr which he took first. Indeed, there
WIS no fundamental faculty connected
With the reasoning powers that might
not be demonstrated to exist IN ,does.-
1eSdes Is1e0rapA