disposed to attack anyone or anything that comes too near their young. This protective instinct is strong in the parents of domesticated animals, especially mothers, altho largely in the way and useless, because there was a time in the past when it was indispensable to the species.

7. Mother Love.

Mother love is not a human invention. It has been inherited. It is older than the Rocky Mountains. Mother love in man came from the same source as the backbone in man—from pre-human forms. Mother love among men is the same thing exactly as mother love among birds and quadrupeds. The mother monkey loves her child with almost the same tenderness as the human mother. When a monkey child dies, the mother carries the little corpse around with her for days, refuses to eat, and sits often in silence and grief. Mother birds will risk their very lives for their young. So will mother bears, and lions, and whales, and the females of many other species.

Now, why is it that this instinct to protect the young has been planted so generally in the females, who are commonly the weaker members of the species? Among vertebrate animals, at least, the males are larger and more powerful than the females, and are physically much better fitted to perform this protective function than the females. Why has not nature given the males this work to do? Has nature made a mistake in planting this

instinct in the breasts of those least fitted to have it?

It is commonly said that the human mother loves her child more than the father because the child is a part of the mother's body. This is not true at all. Mother love among men is stronger than father love for the same reason that the mother bird or the mother bear loves her young more than the father. The greater affection in the mother originated in the pre-human forms of life, and the human species simply inherited it.

In the wild times in which this instinct originated the mother was the only one present at the time young were born and the only one in whom this instinct could be planted. It was better to plant the instinct in the weaker members of the species than not to plant it at all. If the sex relations of the animal kingdom had always been what they are prevailingly among men today, if there had always been a family with one father and one mother in it, there is practically no doubt that the protective instinct would have been developed chiefly in the male in all animals, including man.

Among some fishes the male assumes all the care and anxiety of parenthood. And this is true in at least one or two families of birds. The male ostrich hatches the eggs and looks after the little ones. The greatest enemy of the eggs and young of the stickleback fish is the mother herself. She not only has no affection for them whatever, but would eat every one of them up if she weren't pre

vented from doing so by the father. In very few species of fishes do the females care anything for either the eggs or young. Among fishes, therefore, the instinct to save the young is not the won

THE STICKLEBACK FATHER GUARDING HIS NEST

derful "mother instinct" found in the human and other higher species, but the father instinct.

Among all animals that mate for life, birds and men alike, parental love is more evenly divided between the two sexes than it is among those races

in which there is no permanent family relation. The regard of parents for their young is a provision of nature for saving the species by saving the recruits of the species. And whether this regard is found in one parent, or in the other, or in both of them, depends on the conditions which surround the species and the conditions which have surrounded its ancestors.

As time passes and society assumes more and more the care of the young, it is probable that the love of parents for their own children will grow weaker. Parents will develop a feeling of regard for children as a whole, and will not have that feeling of partiality which they today have so much for their own children. Society is in many ways better fitted to look after its young than are individual parents. Society today carries on the education of the child, providing school houses, teachers, and in some cr ses even books and meals. All of these things were formerly done by parents themselves, that is, in a "private" rather than in a "public" way. And future times will no doubt see still further advances along these same lines. We live in a changing and growing world. If we could come back to the world a thousand years from now, we wouldn't recognize it. There would be new styles, new languages, new nations, new industries, different forms of education, different social relations, and different ideas generally. We go along with our heads down assuming that things will go on much as they are now. This

will not be true. Most of the things we are used to today will be gone a thousand or two thousand years from now. The present is merely a passing phase of things.

8. Copying the Leader.

Years ago, when we lived on a farm in the country, my father kept sheep. And there was one peculiarity in the sheep psychology that I remember very well.

The sheep were kept in a lot at night and turned out on the prairie during the day. Instead of a gate, the lot had what were called "bars." These were wooden pieces extending across the opening one above another, and were pulled to one side when the sheep went in or out. Sometimes, in their eagerness to get out, the sheep would begin their activities before all the "bars" could be "let down." The sheep nearest the opening would jump over, and the rest would follow. Before many had passed, the remaining "bars," of course, would be taken out of the way. But every sheep in the flock would jump at that particular place in imitation of those in front, even tho the obstacle were no longer there.

This copying instinct is a survival of the past. It originated in different conditions from those in which civilized sheep live.

Sheep are mountaineers. They came from the highlands. In their pre-domestic existence they lived in flocks, each flock being led by a wise old