249 
Mr. Nansen, in his interesting work Across Greenland, 
offers us a good illustration of the way in which the theory 
of Natural Selection is often invoked when the circum 
stances of the case scarcely require its introduction. He 
speaks as a convinced believer in animal intelligence :— 
“ Many people seem to think that animals cannot develop their 
own faculties, and have no power of making observations, or of 
drawing conclusions from their own experience. I am not one of 
these people, and I believe that animals, wild as well as tame, have 
eyes to see with, ears to hear with, and understanding of the same 
kind as we men, if not in so high a degree.”—( Vol. z., p. 185.) 
He applies this principle to the shyness of the bladdernose 
seal which resulted from the attacks made upon them by 
Norwegian sealing vessels. 
“ Experience soon taught him, and it was not long before he grew 
shyer. He would no longer let the boats come close in before he took 
to the water. The rifle had now to be used, often at long ranges, and 
even so, it was not easy to fill one’s boats. The most remarkable thing 
was that it was not only the old seal that grew shy, but the youngest 
animals were now astonishingly wary. The parents must have im 
parted their experience to the offspring or the same result must 
have been brought about by heredity, though this seems scarcely 
likely to have happened in so short a time. . . . They have 
learned this lesson in the short space of a decade.”—{Vol. z., p. 187.) 
But this reasonable hypothesis becomes a matter of doubt 
in the mind of Mr. Nansen. He says that “perhaps this 
bladdernose seal affords a good illustration of animal 
intelligence.” He declares that, “ plausible as this theory 
seems, it must be admitted that there are other ways of 
explaining this change of habit. It may arise from the 
action of Natural Selection alone, or from the action of 
animal intelligence supplemented by Natural Selection.” 
The theory that the shyness of the bladdernose seal 
is due to the intelligent perception and avoidance of 
danger is something more than plausible. It does not