The Eaton Democrat. (Eaton, Ohio) 1875-1903, 1880-09-09
Prof. Huxley on Dogs.

Prot. Huxley pointed out by the use
OF a diagram, in which force was given
to the illustration by the skeleton of the
animal being raised on its hind legs,
that In internal construction the only
difference between man and the dog was
n of size and proportion. There was
not a bone in the one which did not ex-
ist in the other-not a single constitu-
emit 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
examination, answered to the collar-bone
OF the man but close dissection would
disclose, in the case Of the lower animal,
u little bone varying in length fromia
third to half an inch, which was indu-
bitably a r~udimentary collar-bone. It
appeared to be of no functional import
ance, 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 st don't believe the dog has
a mind" Well, the only reason he had
for assuming the dog had a mind was
the same reason he had for assuming
that all present had minds. There was
no more evidence of the fact in one than
in the other. Run a pin into a man and
there was a start and q cry, by which
they came to the conclusion that pain
had resulted. Run q pin into a dog,
and there was a howl and an attempt to
bite. Could they say that the dog was a
mere piece of animal machinery? It
was quite true that certain philosophers
had held views of that kind, but COM
nonsense 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 If dogs could see with
anything like the distinctness of man.
Their hearing was indisputably very
acute; but it was q remarkable fact that
that sense was regulated on a totally diff
ferent scale in dogs as compared with
human beings. Did they ever hear ola
dog taking a pleasure in music? On
the contrary, It seemed to cause him
acute pain, accompanied by a horrible
sort of fascination, which fastened him
to the spot at which he was subjected to
the torture.
The sense of smell in q dog was some
thing marvellous, not only from its deli
cacy, but for the fact hat its discrimina-
ton of what was agreeable and the re
verse was exactly the opposite of ours.
They never heard of a dog being infatu.
ated with lavender water or patchouli
he rather reveled in the smells which to
men were a source of horror and disgust.
He had owned a dog which he frequently
left among the thousands frequentine
Regents Park to secrete himself behind
a tree. So soon as the animal found tina,
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 the dog had the power o
distinguishing the particular modifica
ton of the leather of the boots caused
by the wearing of his master, in contra.
distinction to the notifications produced
by hundreds of thousands of other PEG
pie present. As to the ability of dog
to find their way from place to place, he
believed there was an unconscious regis
tration in their minds of the visuaFpict
ures presented to it in the various track
through which they passed, and that TIN
memory worked backward until the dol
reached his destination. No one coult
doubt the moral disposition of dogs
Some we're trustworthy, others more o
less thieves /; some were amiable, other
vicious, and so on. Neither was !her
any doubt that O dog had ideas of equal
ity and inequality. They could easil.
settle that by offering a dog a large an
small piece of meat on the same dish
and by observing which he took first
Indeed, there was no fundamental fac
ulty connected with the reasoning pow
ers that might not be demonstrated t
exist in dogs.