phorus is the first of the little
purifiers of the fields. He is also one of the most celebrated of
insects in respect of his psychical capacities. This undertaker is
endowed, they say, with intellectual faculties approaching to reason,
such as are not possessed by the most gifted of the Bees and Wasps, the
collectors of honey or game. He is honoured by the two following
anecdotes, which I quote from Lacordaire's "Introduction to
Entomology," the only general treatise at my disposal:

"Clairville," says the author, "records that he saw a Necrophorus
vespillo, who, wishing to bury a dead Mouse and finding the soil on
which the body lay too hard, proceeded to dig a hole at some distance
in soil more easily displaced. This operation completed, he attempted
to bury the Mouse in this cavity, but, not succeeding, he flew away,
returning a few moments later accompanied by four of his fellows, who
assisted him to move the Mouse and bury it."

In such actions, Lacordaire adds, we cannot refuse to admit the
intervention of reason.

"The following case," he continues, "recorded by Gledditsch, has also
every indication of the intervention of reason. One of his friends,
wishing to desiccate a Frog, placed it on the top of a stick thrust
into the ground, in order to make sure that the Necrophori should not
come and carry it off. But this precaution was of no effect; the
insects, being unable to reach the Frog, dug under the stick and,
having caused it to fall, buried it as well as the body." ("Suites a
Buffon. Introduction a l'entomologie" volume 2 pages 460-61.--Author's
Note.)

To grant, in the intellect of the insect, a lucid understanding of the
relations between cause and effect, between the end and the means, is
an affirmation of serious import. I know of scarcely any better adapted
to the philosophical brutalities of my time. But are these two little
stories really true? Do they involve the consequences deduced from
them? Are not those who accept them as reliable testimony a little
over-simple?

To be sure, simplicity is needed in entomology. Without a good dose of
this quality, a mental defect in the eyes of practical folk, who would
busy himself with the lesser creatures? Yes, let us be simple, without
being childishly credulous. Before making insects reason, let us reason
a little ourselves; let us, above all, consult the experimental test. A
fact gathered at hazard, without criticism, cannot establish a law.

I do