thoroughly
astonished when the facts of the case were explained to them. And I,
also, as was mentioned on page 100, did not become aware of my own
movements, until I had noted those of Mr. von Osten. In fine, everything
would indicate that we have here not an intention to deceive the
public, but a case of pure self-deception.[AO]

[Footnote AN: There is only one, and I believe it is only a seeming
exception to be found in the literature on the subject. We are told
that about the year 1840 a French revenue official named Leonard had
two hunting dogs that, besides other things, were able to play at
dominoes, and this not only with their master, but with anyone and
without the master's assistance. The owner had educated them simply
for the fun of it, and not for pecuniary gain. This statement is
made by both writers who, apparently independently of one another,
have discussed the case, Youatt[108] and de Tarade.[109] De Tarade
himself played with them, and gives directions how to teach dogs to
play the game. But his exposition is so naive, and even ridiculous,
for those who know anything about the subject, that we do not
believe it necessary to attempt a detailed refutation. Youatt never
saw the animals. But he tells us that not only the dog's partner,
but also the master, sat at the game. Youatt's assertion, however,
that "not the slightest intimation could have been given by Mr.
Leonard to the dog," but that the animal carried on the game by
means of its own observation and calculation, appears to me a rather
bold statement. After my own experience with dogs, I firmly believe
this to have been impossible. Hachet-Souplet,[110] who shares my
conviction, explains the matter as follows: the dog would simply
place a domino having the number of eyes named by his partner, thus
the 6 adjacent to the 6, the 3 to the 3, etc. But even so a great
deal would have to be attributed to the dog, (although in that case
real counting would by no means be absolutely necessary, for an
association between the number term and the total picture of the
corresponding group of eyes would suffice.) But we must note that
neither of the writers mentions that the numbers were always called
aloud by the partner. After the failure of the experiments of Sir
John Lubbock,[111] we must doubt very much if a dog is able to match
one do