130 G. IV. BULMAN [fee. 1899 



When at work upon dandelions they will not wander to a neighbour- 

 ing narcissus. In thus keeping to flowers of the same make, they are 

 consulting their own interest." 



Now, while in this and in other parts of his paper Mr. Headley 

 goes farther than is allowed by the advocates of the insect-selection 

 theory, and too far to render that theory tenable, it is still, according 

 to my observations, short of the truth. Thus, while I have never 

 seen a bee go from dandelion to narcissus I have seen them go from 

 dandelion to chickweed, from Iceland poppy to Cistus, from herb 

 Eobert to lavender, from snapdragon to woundwort, from devil's-bit 

 scabious to knapweed, etc. The fact, however, that bees pass at times 

 from one very different species to another, while it renders the bee still 

 more impossible as an evolver of flowers on the old view, does not 

 affect Mr. Headley's proposed amendment. 



Another point in Mr. Headley's paper seems to call for remark. 

 He asserts that flowers not fertilised by insects " are almost all of them 

 dull and inconspicuous." But there are probably a good many excep- 

 tions to this rule. One of these is specially mentioned, viz. the larch, 

 of which it is said, " In these the colour may, possibly, be looked upon 

 as a by-product of the physiological activity of the plant. The more 

 striking blossoms, elaborate in form and coloration, cannot possibly 

 be mere by-products." 



But this is no explanation : it might with equal truth and justice 

 be said of the blue of the larkspur, the crimson of the cranesbill, or 

 the yellow of the buttercup. Indeed, in every flower the colour is the 

 product — why in any case call it a by-product ? — of the physiological 

 activity of the plant. If the blue of the hyacinth and harebell re- 

 quire a further explanation, so does the red of the larch. 



In conclusion, a word as to my own position as regards this ques- 

 tion. Mr. Headley remarks that certain naturalists, including myself, 

 " have come to the conclusion that the colours of flowers have arisen 

 quite independently of insects." I should prefer to define my position 

 in slightly different words. Instead of saying I have come to the con- 

 clusion that the colours of flowers have arisen quite independently of 

 insects, I should like to put it thus : — 



I conclude, as the result of my observations of the habits of insects 

 visiting flowers, that the theory of the origin of the latter by their 

 selective action, as taught by Darwin, AVallace, Hermann Midler, Sir 

 John Lubbock, and Mr. Grant Allen, is absolutely incompatible with 

 the facts of the mutual relations of insects and flowers. 



29 Queen's Terrace, Jesmond, 

 Newcastle. 



