are taught performing bears do not count for much as proof of high sagacity, as they for the most part consist in teaching the animals to assume unnatural positions, or display grotesque antics-performances which speak indeed for the general docility of the creatures, but scarcely for their high intelligence. Still even here it is worth while to remark that all species of bears would probably not lend themselves to this kind of education, for the emotional temperament manifested by the different species is unquestionably diverse. Thus, making all allowances for exaggeration, it seems certain that the grizzly bear displays a courage and ferocity which are foreign to the disposition of the brown bear, and indeed to that of most other animals. The polar bear likewise displays much bravery under the influence of hunger or maternal feeling, although under other circumstances it usually deems discretion the better part of valour. The following incident displays considerable intelligence on the part of this animal.

Scoresby, in his Account of the Arctic Regions,' gives the instance to which I allude:

The animal with two cubs was being pursued by a party of sailors over an ice-field. She urged her young to an increase of speed by running before them, turning round, and manifesting, by a peculiar action and voice, her anxiety for their progress; but finding that her pursuers were gaining upon them, she carried, or pushed, or pitched them alternately forward, until she effected their escape. In throwing them before her, the little creatures placed themselves across her path to receive the impulse; and when projected some yards in advance, they ran onwards until she overtook them, when they alternately adjusted themselves for a second throw.

As the polar bear is not exposed to any enemies except man, this method of escaping is not likely to be instinctive, but was probably an intelligent adaptation to the particular circumstances of the case.

Mr. S. J. Hutchinson writes me as follows with regard to this same species:

One Sunday, at the Zoo,' some one threw a bun to the bears, but it fell in the water in that quadrant-shaped pond you will

remember. The bun fell just at the angle, and the bear seemed disinclined to enter the water, but stood on the edge of the pond, and commenced stirring the water with its paw, so that it established a sort of rotatory current, which eventually brought the bun within reach. When one leg got tired it used the other, but in the same direction. I watched the whole performance with the greatest interest myself.

6

In corroboration of this most remarkable observation I quote the following from Mr. Darwin's Descent of Man' (p. 76), which is so precisely similar, that the fact of bears reaching the high level of intelligence which the fact implies can scarcely be doubted. A well-known entomologist, Mr. Westropp, informs me that he observed in Vienua a bear deliberately making with his paw a current in some water which was close to the bars of his cage, so as to draw a piece of floating bread within his reach."

CHAPTER XII.

RODENTS.

THE rodents, psychologically considered, are, of all orders in the animal kingdom, most remarkable for the differences presented by constituent species. For while the group contains many animals, such as the guinea-pig, whose instincts and intelligence cannot be said to rise above the lowest level that obtains among mammalian forms, it also contains other animals with instincts as remarkable as those of the squirrel, intelligence as considerable as that of the rat, and a psychological development as unique as that of the beaver. In no other group of animals do we meet with nearly so striking an exemplification of the truth that zoological or structural affinity is only related in a most loose and general way to psychological or mental similarity. Up to a certain point, however, even here we meet with an exemplification of what I may call a complementary truth, namely, that similarity of organisation and environment is in a general way related to similarity of instincts (though not necessarily of intelligence). This is obviously the case with the habit from which the order takes its name; for whether the instinct of gnawing is here the cause or the result of peculiar organisation, the instinct is unquestionably correlated with the peculiarity. And similarly, though less obviously, is this the case with the instinct of storing food for winter consumption, which is more prevalent among the rodents than in any other order of mammalsrats, mice, squirrels, harvesters, beavers, &c., all manifesting it with remarkable vigour and persistency. Here we probably have a case of similar organisation and environment determining the same instinct; for the latter

is not of sufficiently general occurrence among all species of rodents to allow us to suppose that the species in which it does occur have derived it from a common ancestry.

Rabbit.

Rabbits are somewhat stupid animals, exhibiting but small resources under novel circumstances, although inheriting several clever instincts, such as that of rapidly deciding upon the alternative of flight or crouching, which is usually done with the best judgment. I have, however, often observed that the animal does not seem to have sense enough to regard the colour of the surface on which it crouches, so that if this happens to be inappropriate, the rabbit may become conspicuous, and so its crouching a source of danger. I have been particularly struck with the fact that black rabbits inherit the crouching instinct as strongly as do normally coloured ones, with the effect of rendering themselves highly conspicuous. This shows that the instinct is not necessarily correlated with the colour which alone renders the instinct useful, but that both have developed simultaneously and independently, and by natural selection. The fact also shows that the crouching of rabbits is purely instinctive, and not due to any conscious process of comparing their own colour with that of the surfaces on which they crouch. No doubt the instinct began and was developed by natural selection placing a premium upon the better judgment of those individuals which know when best to seek safety in flight and when by crouching-protective colouring being added at the same time by the same agency.

Another fact, which every one who shoots must have observed, goes to show the stupidity of rabbits, or their inability to learn by experience. When alarmed they run for their burrows, and when they reach them, instead of entering they very frequently squat down to watch the enemy. Now, although they well know the distance at which it is safe to allow a man with a gun to approach, excess of curiosity, or a mistaken feeling of security in being so near their homes, induces the animals to allow a

nan to approach within easy shooting distance. Yet that in other respects rabbits can learn much by experience must be evident to all who are accustomed to shoot with ferrets. From burrows which have not been much ferreted, rabbits will bolt soon after the ferret is put in; but this is not the case where rabbits have had previous experience of the association between ferrets and sportsmen. Rather than bolt under such circumstances, and so face the known danger of the waiting gun, rabbits will often allow themselves to be torn with the ferrets' claws and mutilated by their teeth. This is the case, no matter how silently the sportsmen may conduct their operations; the mere fact of a ferret entering their burrows seems to be enough to assure the rabbits that sportsmen are waiting outside.'

In its emotions the rabbit is for the most part a very timid animal, although the males fight severely with one another having more strongly developed than any other animal the strange but effectual instinct of castrating their rivals. Moreover, even against other animals, rabbits will, when compelled to do so, stand upon the defensive. To show this I may quote a letter which several years ago I published in Nature :'

I have occasion just now to keep over thirty Himalayan rabbits in an outhouse. A short time ago it was observed that some of these rabbits had been attacked and slightly bitten by rats. Next day the person who feeds the rabbits observed, upon entering the outhouse, that nearly all the inmates were congregated in one corner; and upon going to ascertain the cause, found one rat dead, and another so much injured that it could scarcely run. Both rats were of an unusually large size, and their bodies were much mangled by the rabbits' teeth.

I never before knew that domestic rabbits would fight with any carnivorous antagonist. That wild rabbits never do so I infer from having several times seen ferrets turn out from the most crowded burrow in a warren young stoats and weasels not more than four inches long.

It is particularly remarkable that if under these circumstances a rabbit bolts and, seeing the sportsman, doubles back into its burrow, being then certain that the sportsman is waiting, it will usually allow itself to be slowly and painfully killed by the ferret rather than bolt a second time. This is remarkable because it proves the strength of an abiding image or idea in the mind of the animal.