og. And the obedience, friendship and devotion of the
dog to his master has been unending. The dog discusses no questions of
right or wrong, his only duty is to obey. This he does without a murmur.
He is the greatest testimony to man's civilisation, the first and the
greatest element of human progress. Through his co-operation man was
elevated from the savage to the state of the civilised. He made the
herd possible. Without him there could have been no herd, no assured
subsistence of food and clothing, no time to study and improve the mind,
no astronomical observations, no science, no arts, no automobiles, no
airships, no wireless telegraphy--nothing. The East is the home of
civilisation, because the East is the home of the dog.

A young hound knows more about tracking game or scenting the enemy after
six months' practice than the most skilled savage after fifty years of
study. The dog has so aided mankind as to give him more time for study
and self-improvement. Thus began the arts and sciences. An interesting,
and we believe original observation, of the influence of the dog on
peoples is that wherever the dog is found, especially among the shepherd
peoples, such as the Chaldeans, Egyptians, Arabs, Tartars, and Mongols,
cannibalism is unknown. This is due to the fact that the dog enables
them to maintain the herds which supply them with milk, food, and
clothing, thus preserving them from the criminal temptation of hunger.

The Indians of North America never refrained from roasting their enemies
until they made allies of the horse and dog. Humboldt proves the lively
regret held by one of the last surviving chief lieutenants of the
war-like Tecumseh whom he asked about a certain American officer who
took part in the fight. "Uh!" replied the Indian, "I eat some of him."
"Do you still eat your enemies?" asked Humboldt. "No," replied the
Indian. "Big dog catch heap meat for me!"

Surely no animal could be more uncivilised or cannibalistic in its
desires than man! Spinoza believed, however, that benevolence in animals
consisted only in their kindliness and friendly feeling for each other
and that we should expect nothing more of them. A good cow, so he
thought, was one that was kind to her calf, however ferocious she might
be toward human children. But we do not accept this standard of
goodness, nor believe that animals' kindness extends only to their own
tribes. Their lowest standard of life is no worse than the cannibalism