“ In every direction we see a struggle for existence ; the empty 
stomach must be filled, therefore one species devours the other. It 
is a system of terrorism from the beginning to the end. The fowl 
destroys the worm, the hawk destroys the fowl, the cat destroys the 
hawk, the dog kills the cat, the leopard kills the dog, the lion kills 
the leopard, and the lion is slain by man. Man appears upon the 
scene of general destruction as the greatest of all destroyers, as he 
alone in creation, wars against his own species. We hear of love, and 
pity, and Christian charity ; we see torpedoes and hellish inventions 
of incredible power to destroy our fellow-creatures. The inventors 
of these horrible engines of destruction receive titles arid the highest 
honours, while those who have worked in progressive science for the 
welfare of mankind are forgotten in the obscure laboratory, although 
the saving light which they invented is gleaming above the hidden 
rock, for the benefit of all, to expose the danger of the sea. Thus 
with one hand we save, with the other we destroy.”—(Wild beasts 
a7id their ways. vol. ii., p. 376.) 
Compare with this the genial observation of the accom 
plished naturalist, Mr. Belt. 
“ Hawks of various kinds are very abundant in the tropics, and if 
the small birds had to personify death they would certainly represent 
him as one, for this is the form in which he must generally appear 
to them. Towards evening the hawk glides noiselessly along and 
alights on a bough, near where he hears the small birds twittering 
amongst the bushes. Perhaps they see him, and are quiet for a little, 
but he sits motionless as the sphinx, and they soon get over their 
fear and resume their play or feeding. Then suddenly a dark mass 
swoops down and rises again. It is the hawk, with a small bird, 
grasped in his strong talons, gasping out its last breath. Its comrades 
are terror-struck for a moment, and dash madly into the thickets, 
but soon forget their fear. They chirp to each other, the scattered 
birds reunite ; there is a fluttering and a twittering, a rearranging of 
mates, then again songs, feeding, love, jealousy, and bickerings.”— 
(The Naturalist in Nicaragua, pp. 237-8.) 
One reason of the discrepancy may arise from a certain 
indistinctness of appreciation either on the part of writer 
or reader, and sometimes, perhaps, on the part of both. 
Thus, in speaking of the nature of the variations which 
arise in nature, it is possible that the difference arises from 
the failure to distinguish the variations which are inevitably