man consider for a moment how much would be detracted from the delights of the early summer months, if the feathered tribes were dumb, and he will be better able to appreciate the beneficence of the provision, as regards the human race.

But we must never forget, that the Universal Parent has not confined his paternal care to man alone. It is pleasing to see the same attention paid to the lower creation, up to the extent which their humbler sphere requires. The songs of birds, which are so agreeable to us, are probably more delightful, and far more significant, to the respective tribes which give utterance to them. They are to them the language of conjugal affection, of parental love, of triumphant exultation, of social enjoyment. They animate and urge forward the labors of nest-building; they cheer the tedium of incubation; they infuse joy into the hearts of the callow brood; they bid defiance to enemies, and inspire friends with confidence.

But the voice of birds is not confined to musical intonations. Their Creator has bestowed upon them the power of communicating with each other in a still more extensive manner; and although they are incapable of uttering articulate sounds, these tribes, as well as other orders of the lower animals, may, in a limited sense, be said to possess the power of intercourse by means of a natural language, the utterances of which, are instinctively understood by each species respectively. Dr. Macculloch's work contains some curious and ingenious remarks on the language of the lower animals, which may, perhaps, in some particulars, be rather over-strained, but which deserve serious consideration. He alleges, that the ears of these animals are more susceptible of a minute distinction of sounds, than those of the human race; and hence infers, that they have a greater variety in their language than we can properly comprehend. In the nightingale and thrush," says he, "we distinguish a great number of sounds and articulations, because they belong or approach to that musical scale for which our sense of hearing is adapted. But we cannot doubt, that in these, and still

more in birds whose tones are less musical and definite, there are sounds which we do not truly distinguish, and which we, therefore, neglect, in favor of those to which we are most sensible. And there is no difficulty in believing, that the song of a nightingale is better understood by itself than by us, or that it contains much more than we hear. If I were to suggest that it contains a definite set of phrases, with meaning to the animal itself and its kind, there would be nothing absurd in the proposition, since it possesses, even to our ears, a greater variety of articulation than we can find in any human language with which we are acquainted; while, in confirmation of this general view, all who have attended to such subjects must know, that where these birds abound, long debates are often carried on among them, in tones and articulations quite distinct from the ordinary songs. When we decide otherwise, we are deciding from a prejudice, or assuming that it is not a language, because we do not understand it. We should be equally justified in thus deciding as to the Arabic."*

Having shown that the lower animals may possess language more definite than at first sight we might be inclined to believe, Dr. Macculloch proceeds to instance cases in which this faculty may, at least to a certain extent, be proved to exist. Confining myself at present to the case of birds, I quote the following remarks. "Familiar examples of various and vocal language exist in the duck tribe, followed by corresponding actions, in marshalling their flights, and in much more. The sounds and articulations of the domestic duck and goose, in particular, are so numerous and marked, that they are not equalled by any human language; while it is not difficult to learn the definite, if not the general, meaning of many of them. It is not easy to see how else the decoy duck can perform her treacherous office." "In the endeavor of birds to persuade their progeny to fly and to

*Attributes of God,' vol. i. p. 559. Dr. Macculloch strengthens his argument by a learned dissertation on the nature of musical sounds, and defects in the human ear, on which I do not think it necessary to enter.

dive, we can scarcely avoid believing that we hear a definite language, so unusual, and varied, and marked, are the articulations and tones. The quarrels of sparrows are more articulate, and the noises more varied, than those of a human contest. The sounds of the domestic fowl under the approach of a hawk, the intention to sit, the calling its young to feed, and much more, equally familiar, are not less various and definite. But, not to encumber these pages with facts that all can supply, I need only add the equally noted cases of the cat and the rook. However disagreeable the sounds of the former may be to us, they abound in variety of expression; and in the latter, the comparison of actions and sounds, under a fact of familiar occurrence, renders it scarcely possible to avoid concluding, that the latter constitute a language. The destruction of a rook's nest, occasionally proceeding to the slaughter of the animal, is preceded by a congregation of the society, and a great noise; and all know that the work is executed by the deputation of two or three individuals out of this convention."

These observations, and others made by this author on the power which the lower animals have of communication by sound, are doubtless founded in truth, although they appear to be carried too far. That birds and other creatures have, to a certain extent, the power of conveying their meaning to others of their own species, by the different intonations of their voice, there can be no doubt; but it is equally true, that this power is as limited as their mental faculties, and their mutual necessities of communication; and although such a faculty may be dignified by the name of language, yet that term must then be employed in a very restricted sense. As far as it goes, however, it is a provision which must greatly contribute to the happiness of the animals possessing it. The sympathy which is thus created among the members of a feathered family, commencing with the mates when they begin to pair, and extending through all their labors, till the connexion ends, if it does end, in the production and education of the brood, tends, doubtless, to endear and enlarge their intercourse, while it lightens their varied

employments; and, in the gregarious tribes, the communication which is thus effected, of hope and fear, of pain and enjoyment, as well as of some other kinds of information useful to their subsistence, or their escape from danger, promotes not less truly, though in a less important sense, the welfare of the individuals and of the species; thus affording another instance of paternal regard in the great Author of Nature.

EIGHTH WEEK-SATURDAY.

BIRDS. THEIR SELECTION OF FOOD.

It is the obvious intention of the Creator that every kind of production fit for the food of animals should be devoured. Nothing can be more curious and admirable than what may be called the economical arrangements which have been adopted for this purpose. Every kind of herb, and flower, and fruit, every kind of succulent vegetable, in short, has some species of living creature which subsists on its produce; and animals themselves are, respectively, objects of preference as food to different classes of the animated creation. Some species, for example, exclusively devour insects, others fishes, others fowls, and others quadrupeds, while others again are omnivorous. And what is not less worthy of remark is, the nice selection which some animals make, not merely of a particular class of animals or vegetables, but of particular kinds of that class. This is, doubtless, intended by the Author of Nature, for the purpose of insuring a more complete execution of his great design of rendering every thing useful, and thus spreading a "liberal feast for all that lives." There is, in this appropriation of particular kinds of food by particular animals, an effect produced something analogous to the division of labor. The work is better done.

Among birds, this kind of selection is singular, and a few facts connected with the subject may not be unin

teresting. "Our gardens, shrubberies, and orchards," says Mr. Knap, speaking of the smaller kinds of birds, "become their resort, seeking for the fruits usually produced in those places. And first the fannette, (Philomela hortensis,) with all their matured brood, is certain to be found feeding voraciously upon our cultivated berries, or mining a hole in the fig or jargonel pear; and so intent are they upon this occupation, that they will permit a reasonable examination of their form and actions; but at other periods, it is difficult to approach them." After mentioning, also, in his characteristic style, the blackcap and the white-throat tribes, along with others, he adds, "All these fruit-eating birds seem to have a very discriminating taste, and a decided preference for the richest sorts, the sweetest variety of the gooseberry or the currant always being selected; and when they are consumed, less saccharine dainties are submitted to; but the hedge-berry of the season, our little foreign connoisseurs disdain to feed on, leaving it to far humbler-appetited natives; they are away to sunnier regions, and more grateful food.""*

Mr. Rennie mentions, that these species are equally nice in their preferences and rejections of insects and other small animals, on which they also feed. "We had a fannette, for example," says he, "which was exceedingly fond of spiders, the largest of which he would contrive to swallow; but the black-cap, though it will devour flies of every sort, will not touch a spider; and while it will eat almost any smooth caterpillar, it will not touch those of the cabbage-butterfly, which the fannette devoured with avidity. Neither of these birds, again, nor the nightingale, will touch an earth-worm, of which the redbreast is very fond. No bird will touch the caterpillar of the magpie-moth."

There is, then, an obvious choice of food in these birds, which indicates taste; and the same thing may be averred of many other species. It seems difficult, however, to say where this faculty resides, as they swallow

* Journal of a Naturalist, p. 232, 3d edition.

† Faculties of Birds, p. 81, 82.