« ZurückWeiter »
to confine his terms to the exclusive use of the Somersetshire quarrymen, as we have little doubt the pronunciation of them would become more mellifluous by an admixture with the euphonic tones of the western dialect. Whatever may be the minor faults of the present volume, the plates alone, with the descriptions of them, possess such value as to entitle it to a place in every public library and institution where science is respected; and we are fully persuaded that a correct translation of the anatomical details, in the French language, published with the plates, would be favourably received on the Continent.—B.
Hastings, C., M.D.: Illustrations of the Natural History of Worcestershire, with Information on the Statistics, Zoology, and Geology of the County, including also a short Account of its Mineral Waters. 8vo, upwards of 200 pages, with a geological map of Worcestershire. London and Worcester, 1834. 4s. 6d. This tells enough of the natural history, and of the Natural
History Society, of Worcestershire, to be a book to be de
sired by those who would acquaint themselves with either.
Anon. : The Analyst, and Monthly Journal of Science, Literature, and the Fine Arts. August, No. I. 8vo, 76 pages, with cuts. London, 1834. .1s. 6d. In the general scope purposed to be embraced by the producers of this Review, natural history will not be overlooked; as is evident from the first number, in which Mr. Lees's Affinity of Plants with Man and Animals, and some other works on natural history, are noticed. It contains, too, interesting information on the aurora.
Innes, H. : A New Edition of Goldsmith's Natural History, with Notes from all the Popular Treatises that have been issued since the Time of Goldsmith; collected with the utmost care. In monthly parts (and weekly numbers), 8vo; each of 48 pages, with some woodcuts. Limbird, London. We have seen parts i. and ii. The notes are entertaining
and instructive; and the work is cheap.
ART. II. Literary Notices.
A History of British Fishes, by William Yarrell, F.L.S., is in preparation. It is to be illustrated by woodcuts of all the species, and numerous vignettes, subservient to the general subject; representing teeth, gill-covers, swimming-bladders,
and other viscera, occasionally, when interesting in structure, form, or function. The different boats, nets, or other apparatus in use on the coast, will be figured, and the modes of employing them described. The work will form two volumes octavo, uniform in size with Bewick’s British Birds. We have seen a series of impressions of the cuts executed for this work, and can bear testimony to their accuracy and beauty. The Third Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science is published. It contains a Report on physiological botany, by Dr. Lindley; and other communications, of interest to naturalists. No. viii. of the Entomological Magazine sustains the reputation of this most valuable work; which, we trust, will ever henceforth be felt by naturalists to be an indispensable one. A Grammar of Entomology: being a compendious introduction to the economy, anatomy, classification, and preservation of insects, by E. Newman, F.L.S., is announced. “As it is the author's object to render this work generally useful, it will be published at a very low price; and no Latin or technical terms will be used without explanation.” (Ent. Mag.) An Essay on the Indigenous Fossorial Hymenoptera, comprising a description of all the British species of sand wasps extant in the metropolitan cabinets, by W. E. Shuckard, has been announced for publication. Part iii. of Royle's Illustrations of the Botany and other Branches of the Natural History of the Himalayan Mountains, and of the Flora of Cashmere, is published. It is as interesting as the preceding ones. In a continuation of the “Introduction,” information is given on the relative heights of the Himalayan Mountains, as compared with each other and the known heights of those in other countries. A treatise on the Indian species of Gossypium, or cotton, is given in the text, descriptive of the plants; and, in the plates, there are, besides the figures of plants, one plate of “fossil plants from the Burdwan coal formation,” and a plate exhibiting figures of Cérvus Dödur and C. Rútwa Hodgson; two pretty animals. A Prodromus of a Flora of the Peninsula of India is in preparation by Dr. Wight and Mr. Arnott. The work is to be written “in the English language, and will be completed in two volumes. The first, comprising from Ranunculaceae to the end of Rubiaceae, will be ready in a few weeks.” Part iii. of Hooker's Journal of Botany, which has reached us since the publication of our last, is rich in contents of high interest to every technical botanist.
ART. I. Thoughts on the Question, Why cannot Animals speak
the Language of Man? By J. J. A query to this purport is given in I. 299., and I have not observed a reply to it in any subsequent volume. In order to state the several points of the question fully and explicitly, it may be proper to repeat the words of the querist. Why," he observes, “ beasts do not speak the language of man,
is not he question I would propose; but why (as is evident) they cannot? Whether it is owing, to use a musical phrase, to their want of ear; whether, to use a philosophical one, it results from their want of understanding; or whether, as I am apt to think, it arises from the want of a proper conformation of the organs most necessary in speaking ?”
It appears to me, from the mode in which this interrogatory is expressed, that the writer is of the class of thinkers who deny to all animals the possession of attributes, or faculties, with which many of them are unquestionably endowed. It might be easily proved that the higher orders of the animal kingdom possess, and some of them in an eminent degree, faculties which they are here said to “ want.” 66 Want of ear” is an expression vague and obscure enough when applied to animals; but if it mean, as I presume it does, the want of a capability of distinguishing variations, or differences of sound, it is manifestly false in its application to animals. Were all animals unable to distinguish the difference between one sound and another, how could they ever be taught to comprehend the meanings of various articulate sounds ? to understand, partially, the language of man? How could they be subjected to the purposes of domestication ? and of what use, indeed, would their ears be to them? How could a dog know his
Vol. VII. — No. 42.
name, and be taught to go or come at the command of his master 2 a horse to proceed forwards or turn backwards, to turn to the right or left, at a single word of his driver ? “Want of understanding” must mean want of reason. It has been asserted, and repeated, thousands of times, that reason is the exclusive prerogative of man; that man is the only rational creature. But how has this ever been proved? Assuredly not by facts. I have no inclination to discuss the question, which has already been treated on at great length, and with much candour and ability, in Griffiths's edition of Cuvier's Animal Kingdom, iii. 360. et seq.; and I shall merely instance one quality, which, wheresoever it is found, whether in a man or a goose, appears to me to be undeniably demonstrative of the existence of the reasoning principle, and that is, the capability of receiving instruction, or of forming certain conclusions from previous experience. We recognise this quality, in a greater or less degree, throughout the higher orders of animals; and, view it as we will, we can conclude it to be the effect of nothing else than reason: and it is utterly inconsistent with the acknowledged properties of instinct. It is a combined result of memory and judgment; faculties which no one has ever said are not essentially rational, and which are principally effective in rendering the human intellect what it actually is. In short, we cannot deny to animals the possession of that mysterious something which we call mind; of a mind similar to ours in kind, although infinitely inferior to ours in degree. But to leave this digression, and attempt a direct reply to the question at the head of this article. For this purpose, I cannot do better than quote the observations of Mr. Lawrence (in his Lectures on Physiology, zoology, and the Natural History of Man) on the subject: — “Man,” says he, “exhibits, by external signs, what passes within him; he communicates his sentiments by words: and this sign is universal. The savage and the civilised man have the same power of utterance: both speak, naturally, and are equally understood. It is not owing, as some have imagined, to any defect in their organs that animals are denied the faculty of speech. The tongue of a monkey is as perfect as that of a man; yet monkeys cannot speak. Several animals may be taught to pronounce words, and even to repeat sentences; which proves clearly that the want of speech is not owing to any defect in their organs. But to make them conceive the ideas which these words express is beyond the power of art: they articulate and repeat like an echo or machine. Language implies a train of thinking; and, for this reason, brute animals are incapable of speech: for, though their external senses are not inferior to our own, and though we should allow some of them to possess a dawning of comparison, reflection, and judgment, it is certain that they are unable to form that association of ideas in which alone the essence of thought consists.” (p. 199, 200.)
Gelly, Montgomeryshire, March 1, 1834.
ART. II. Facts and Arguments in relation to the Two Questions, Are all Birds in the Habit of alluring Intruders from their Nest? and, Why do Birds sing? By C. CoNWAY, Esq.
ARE all Birds in the Habit of alluring Intruders from their Nests *—The lapwing will fly round and round, tumbling and tossing in the air, and at the same time making the country resound with the echoes of its endless pee-wit, and thus lead the intruder farther and farther from its nest; the grouse, if disturbed from her nest, will shuffle through the heath in a very awkward manner, and will not take wing until she has proceeded a considerable distance. [The partridge will do the same.] I once found a skylark do the same. Having been informed of the nest, in a corn field, I proceeded thither to see the eggs, but, finding the bird on the nest, and having my butterfly net in my hand, I easily captured her. When I took the bird into my hand, she feigned death, and allowed herself to be handled for a considerable time, and that rather roughly, and when I threw her from me, in the expectation that she would take wing, she fell to the ground like a stone, and there she lay for me to push her about with my foot, until I at last thought that I had injured her in the capture, and that she was absolutely dead. Remaining quiet, however, for a very short period, the bird began moving, and, with one wing trailing along the ground, and shuffling along as if one of her legs had been broken, she proceeded for a considerable distance, and then took wing. Is there not here an evident distinction shown between instinct and reason? Instinct taught the bird to lure all intruders from her nest, but she could not reason that, as I had already discovered her nest and captured her upon it, the lure was, in this instance, useless. But, the circumstance that led to these remarks is the following. In pursuing an azure blue butterfly, I was diverted from my object by the melodies of a nightingale almost close at my side. The .# was in one continuous, incessant, and uninterrupted melody; there were none of