334 
DARWINISM 
CHAP. 
of colour or marking, often superimposed upon protective 
tints, in the importance of easy recognition by many animals 
of their fellows, their parents, or their mates. By this need 
we have been able to account for markings that seem calcu¬ 
lated to make the animal conspicuous, when the general tints 
and well-known habits of the whole group demonstrate the 
need of concealment. Thus also we are able to explain the 
constant symmetry in the markings of wild animals, as well as 
the numerous cases in Avhich the conspicuous colours are con¬ 
cealed when at rest and only become visible during rapid motion. 
In striking contrast to ordinary protective coloration we 
have “ warning colours,” usually very conspicuous and often 
brilliant or gaudy, which serve to indicate that their possess¬ 
ors are either dangerous or uneatable to the usual enemies 
of their tribe. This kind of coloration is probably more 
prevalent than has been hitherto supposed, because in the 
case of many tropical animals we are cpiite unacquainted with 
their special and most dangerous enemies, and are also un¬ 
able to determine whether they are or are not distasteful to 
those enemies. As a kind of corollary to the “warning 
colours,” we find the extraordinary phenomena of “mimicry,” 
in which defenceless species obtain protection by being mis¬ 
taken for those which, from any cause, possess immunity from 
attack. Although a large number of instances of warning 
colour and of mimicry are now recorded, it is probably still 
an almost unworked field of research, more especially in 
tropical regions and among the inhabitants of the ocean. 
The phenomena of sexual diversities of coloration next 
engaged our attention, and the reasons why Mr. Darwin’s theory 
of “ sexual selection,” as regards colour and ornament, could 
not be accepted were stated at some length, together with 
the theory of animal coloration and ornament we propose 
to substitute for it. This theory is held to be in harmony 
with the general facts of animal coloration, while it entirely 
dispenses Avith the very hypothetical and inadequate agency 
of female choice in producing the detailed colours, patterns, 
and ornaments, which in so many cases distinguish the male 
sex. 
If my arguments on this point are sound, they will dispose 
also of Mr. Grant Allen’s view of the direct action of the 
