Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1880-05-20
Vol. XVI. Whole Nc. 1921. No. q.
From the London Telegraph
Professor Huxley on Dogs.


of diagram, in which force was given to
the illustration by the skeleton of the ami
mai being raised on the hind legs, that in
internal construction the only difference be-
tween man and dog was one of size and pro-
portion There was not bone in one
which did not exist in the other-not sin
gle 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 ex-
animation. answered to the collar bone of
the man; but close dissection would disclose
in the case Of the lower animal little bone
varying in length from third to half AN
inch, occupying the same place as the hu-
man eollar-bone, which was induhitably a
rudImentary collar-bone. Ii 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 mind" Well, the only
reason he had for assuming that the dog had
a mind 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 pin in
to a man, and there was u start and cry. by
which they came to the conclusion that pain
had resulted. Run pin into a dog. and
there was a 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 that the
dog was a mere piece Of animate machin-
cry? Il was quite true that certain philoso-
pliers had held views of that Kind, but COM
mon sense people were right. At the same
time he was disposed TO think that in dogs
the feeling Of pain was infinitely duller than
in human beings. As to the other senses
belonging To dogs, he was inclined to doubt
very much if dogs could see with anything
like the dS,Inctness Of a man. Their hear
ing indisputahly very acute but il was
a remarkable fact that that sense was regu-
lated on totally different scale in dogs As
compared with human beings
Did thcv ever hear Of dog taking a
pleasure in music ? On the contrary, the
sounds Of music seemed to cause him acute
pam, accompanied by horrible sort of fas-
ciuation, which fastened him to the spot at
which he was subjected to thc torture. Else,
when German band was doing It's worst in
the streets, why did he sit upon his launches
and howl When he might get up and run
away Vet hr often wondered whether
dog, really did suffer pain from music or
whether they howlrd purely in sympathy, a.
did the lachals of the prairies
The sense of smell in a dog WAS some
thing mar,c!ous-marvellou not only for
it, deucacy, but for the fact that its discrim-
nation OF what was agreeable and Disagree
able was exactly the reverse Of ours. They
never heard Of dog being infatuated with
lavender water, or patchouh, or Eau de Col
ogne he rather rr,tllcd in the smells which
10 men were source of uufcigncd horror
and disgust. He once possessed dog hich
hc frequently left among the thousands FIRE
qucuunS Regent, Park, to sccretc himself