have been been observed among rooks, crows, ravens, storks, sparrows, and a few other birds.

Signor Muccioli, Secretary to the Roman Society for Pigeon Breeding, has made a careful scientific study of his dove-cotes, and published some important observations of degeneration and criminality among his birds. These carrier pigeons, he tells us, are in general sociable, loving their little ones and those of their own species, mild and peaceable by disposition, scrupulously neat, very jealous of their nest, and monogamous, with almost absolute faithfulness to the conjugal tie. But as among men, there exist lazy, weak degenerates among the pigeons, and experience has taught him that these are found usually among the birds discarded as good for nothing in the messenger service. They are the most lazy and the least intelligent of the dove-cote. He studies his pigeons one by one, and attributes the victories of his messengers largely to the care with which he eliminates degenerates from among them. He finds that these present a greater number of mental lesions and other defects, and prevent the perfecting of the species. "How great," he writes, "is the intelligence of the perfect pigeon, and how deficient that of the degenerate." The strong and bright birds lend themselves readily to his hands when he is seeking a messenger, eagerly volunteering for the expedition from which they are sure to return victorious. Those that hang back are frequently the ones that hurt or lose themselves if sent. Active anti-social conduct occurs, but is not comGrown males have been known to commit violent incest upon their young male offspring, having none of the developed instruments of sex, and they occasionally ravish little young females; but "veritable incest is rather rare." A mother pigeon of the Liegest variety habitually killed her little ones by peckings on the head until the brains came out. "It seemed," writes our author, "a crime without the

mon.

30

Active Disloyalty to the Community

slightest social stimulus among pigeons, from whom I eliminated without difficulty these true born criminals." There are thieves among pigeons, which try to steal the straws collected by the others for their nests, and there are vicious birds, "ready to wound for a mere nothing." These offenders are in general lazy, unintelligent and bad messengers. Serious combats occur, the fighting being done by strokes of the beak upon the neck, but the struggle has never been observed to cause death.'

Keepers of parks, where wild animals are inclosed, have often observed the great differences among individuals of the same species; some remaining always savage and morose, while many of their fellows were becoming quite tame and friendly to man. Among domestic animals also-horses, dogs and cattle-there are always some untamably ferocious individuals, cruel and violent, seemingly from innate wickedness.

Sir John Lubbock's most careful experiments with ants seem to show individual differences between those of the same species, just as between men; but whether there are any free individuals punished by the ant community we do not know. The greatest harmony appears to reign, and as a rule, according to Huber, not even the slaves are subject to the slightest compulsion; yet insurrections of these slaves are mercilessly punished with death. Affection can hardly be the bond holding together these great communities, sometimes numbering 500,000 ants, for experiments have shown that hatred is much the stronger passion with them.

Many facts thus unite to prove that the higher, more intelligent animal communities do inflict severe social punish ment for a few acts, dangerously antagonistic to the social welfare; such as: 1. Active disloyalty to the community-i. e., rebellion against constituted authority, and faithlessness or negligence

1 Muccioli, xiv, pp. 39–42.

in the performance of military duty: Monkeys. 2. Intolerably anti-social disposition, manifested by repeated acts of malignant ferocity against those of their own kind: Elephants, hippopotami, buffaloes, wild cattle, and possibly rabbits, pigeons, and other social and intelligent birds. 3. The revolt of slaves: Ants. The first and second of these sets of noxious acts may be classed under the one term, Treason; and, if the malignant ferocity, mentioned under two, take the form of violent opposition to the acknowledged leader of the band, this also would be a treasonable offence.

There is one other form of conduct which seems to waken intense abhorrence, and bring severe punishment from some animal groups, namely: adulterous acts against nature; and in one instance, incest, or adultery: Anthropoid apes (the Soko), storks, ravens and domestic poultry.

True instances of murder and theft are known among animals, but such conduct does not seem to be socially punished. In all the animal communities, actively anti-social individuals appear to be very few, and social punishment for such offenders consequently infrequent. As we descend lower in the scale of intelligence and sociability, the evidence of a true social penalty grows weak and soon disappears, although traces of malignantly anti-social conduct continue for some time longer.'

The scientific study of animal psychology and sociology is yet in its infancy, and the facts at our disposal are necessarily few, yet they seem to warrant fully the belief that the

1" Forse s'avvera anche qui nel mondo animale quell'altra legge del mondo umano, che la criminalita cresce in rapporto diretto della genialità e dell' intelligenza." Lombroso.

The author did not discover the sentence just quoted from Archivio di Psichiat ria, xiv, 450, until Civilization Through Crime was mostly written and completely thought out. He is glad of the support afforded by the words of so distinguished a thinker, but is not aware that Professor Lombroso has ever developed his idea.

32

Social Reflex Action

conduct punished by animal communities is such as strikes directly at social unity and racial effectiveness; actions which, if left unrepressed, would soon destroy the social group. But this certainly does not prove the belief of animals in individual moral guilt, nor any thought that the acts punished are essentially bad for the social welfare.

Scientific investigators into animal psychology are generally agreed that to morality no brute can aspire; ideas of good and evil are beyond their comprehension. How, then, shall we explain the collective punishment by animals of conduct which we know to be thoroughly bad for the social group? The answer is not far to seek. Such punishment is due to what we may call Social Reflex Action-to instinctive antipathy, innate aversion, a feeling that certain individuals are radically unlike their fellows, and that they must be punished, followed by the infliction of social vengeance. The phenomenon is one of instinctive defensive reaction against Such the trangressor of old and necessary social customs. social reaction implies a common consciousness of injury done, but does not imply judicial punishment. Animals do not know why they punish. To this extent, therefore, crime, in the full human meaning of that word, does not exist among the brutes.

The actions of animals are for the most part automatic, obedient to impressions registered in the nervous system These imthroughout countless generations of ancestors. pressions, coming from the external world along the nerve channels, have reference to self preservation, and induce certain acts, warding off the harmful stimulus and supporting Animals which react in a certain way the beneficial one. are rewarded with life and dominance, while those reacting in other ways die out and disappear from the earth. Thus, by constant repetition, the helpful reaction becomes habitual, and is performed instinctively and often unconsciously and

instantaneously. What would become of our eyes if a conscious message was required from the brain to make the eyelids shut before approaching danger? Lifting of the arms when falling is another instance of instinctive defensive reaction against anticipated harm. A man struck by another in the street instinctively returns the blow, and only a strong exertion of the will by one well used to self-control can prevent the customary reaction. Even the coward will strike back and then run away. The child passionately kicking a door which has jammed his finger is acting in a strictly natural manner.

But frequently, according to Professor James, the stimulus to action is but a sign of some distant circumstance of practical importance. Then "the animal's acts are addressed to this circumstance, so as to avoid its perils, or secure its benefits," as the case may be. To an outside observer, all such acts might seem inspired by intelligence, for in them there seems to be a choice of proper means for the attainment of the end in view; but we know that some occur in entire unconsciousness on the part of the actor, while others are accompanied by consciousness-sometimes intense consciousness-but no volition. In this latter class would seem to fall the punishment of offenders by animal communities. For the habits of associating individuals grow more and more alike through natural selection and imitation, and become the social customs of the community. Strict obedience to custom is required from all on pain of death or banishment. Should the social group fail to enforce this obedience, it must itself perish, for through the ages, the record of those acts requisite for individual and social survival has been registered in the nerve centres, and disobedience is death. Indeed disobedience is often impossible, for through long ancestral habit many reactions have be1 James, i, 12.