Perhaps the most remarkable of all the allegations which ever have been put forward in this connexion are those that were current with regard to instincts before the publication of Darwin's work. These allegations are the most remarkable, because they serve to show, in a degree which I do not believe could be shown anywhere else, the warping power of preconceived ideas. A short time ago I happened to come across the 8th edition of the _Encyclopædia Britannica_, and turned up the article on "Instinct" there, in order to see what amount of change had been wrought with regard to our views on this subject by the work of Darwin--the 8th edition of the _Encyclopædia Britannica_ having been published shortly before _The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection_. I cannot wait to give any lengthy quotations from this representative exponent of scientific opinion upon the subject at that time; but its general drift may be appreciated if I transcribe merely the short concluding paragraph, wherein he sums up his general results. Here he says:-- It thus only remains for us to regard instinct as a mental faculty, _sui generis_, the gift of God to the lower animals, that man in his own person, and by them, might be relieved from the meanest drudgery of nature. Now, here we have the most extraordinary illustration that is imaginable of the obscuring influence of a preconceived idea. Because he started with the belief that instincts _must_ have been implanted in animals for the benefit of man, this writer, even when writing a purely scientific essay, was completely blinded to the largest, the most obvious, and the most important of the facts which the phenomena of instinct display. For, as a matter of fact, among all the many thousands of instincts which are known to occur in animals, there is no single one that can be pointed to as having any special reference to man; while, on the other hand, it is equally impossible to point to one which does not refer to the welfare of the animal presenting it. Indeed, when the point is suggested, it seems to me surprising how few in number are the instincts of animals which have proved to be so much as of secondary or accidental benefit to man, in the same way as skins, furs, and a whole host of other animal products are thus of secondary use to him. Therefore, this writer not only failed to perceive the most obvious truth that every instinct, without any single exception, has reference to the animal which presents it; but he also conceived a purely fictitious inversion of this truth, and wrote an essay to prove a statement which all the instincts in the animal kingdom unite in contradicting.