It is beyond doubt that the intellectual superiority of civilised man over his savage brethren is due to the greater multiplicity of his objects of thought, and it follows that savage man’s intellectual superiority over the lower animals is due to the same cause. The actions of both have the same aim—viz., the supplying of the wants of the physical nature and the gratifying of the desires aroused in the mind. It is frequently asserted that man differs from the lower animals in possessing the power of reflection; but this I hold to be an exploded argument, and at variance with all recent teaching. Dogs, elephants, and monkeys most certainly possess the faculty of reflection, and it is not difficult to find races belonging to the human family whose powers of reflection transcend hardly in the least degree those possessed by the higher apes; while the difference between the reflective capacity of the lowest savage, which is of the simplest conceivable kind, and that of the civilised European, which has developed into genius, is enormous. Then, again, it is often said that only man is emotional; but one need only have an ordinary acquaintanceship with domestic animals to at once see the absurdity of this argument, for dogs are frequently observed to laugh, to cry, to express joy and gratitude by their actions, and to betray feelings of shame and remorse; while horses and elephants have been observed to punish their cruel keepers in the most cunning manner and then to laugh at the poor fellows’ discomfiture. As to the “conscience argument,” so frequently brought forward, by religionists especially, all I have to say here is that conscience, or the knowledge of the distinction between right and wrong, is not an inherent quality of the human mind, being merely a result of the operation of the reflective faculty aided by experience, as is quite evident from the fact that the ideas of morality vary according to the age in which we live. The same may be said about the greatest of all the arguments against evolution—viz., that of language; for, just as conscience is but a product of reflection and experience, so is language also. It is a mistake to imagine that the power of speech is possessed by man alone, and that his language differs altogether from the cries and signals of the lower animals, for such is not the case. Many animals possess the faculty of speech, and human language differs from that of the lower animals only in its degree of development, and in no sense in its origin. Probably all language originated in interjection, or the “instinctive expression of the subjective impressions derived from external nature,” as Mr. Farrar puts it. And, just as the reflective powers of the race were developed and shone more brilliantly as each stage in the evolutionary march of intellect was passed, so did language pass from the simple monosyllabic cries to the complex dialects of modern civilisation; and