i'gi3 ' Barbour, The Case of Roosevelt vs. Thayer. So 



Scissors-tailed Flycatcher is conspicuous in shape, hut we are not 

 informed, how a bird can be conspicuous in shape." I can answer 

 this question easily by simply stating thai a bird can be conspicuous 

 in shape by being like a Scissors-^tailed Flycatcher. I strongly 

 mistrust thai Mr. Allen lias never seen one of these birds in life; 

 their conspicuous shape and their still more conspicuous method of 



displaying it in their open Plains habital would have saved Mr. 



Allen from making such a naive display of his ignorance, had the 



opportunity for observation ever been presented to him. Mr 



Roosevelt is absolutely correct, when he says that the bird is con- 

 spicuous 'in color and in habit, has no concealing coloration, and 

 never conceals itself.' Mr. Roosevelt has obviously seen the bird 

 in life. 1 also have had the good fort line to observe it. This is 

 not a case where Mr. Roosevelt can he called 'stupid.' In a later 

 paragraph we are given another example of 'Roosevelt's dogma- 

 tism.' His statement that the typical red fox and the cross fox 

 are 'equally successful in life' is challenged, and we are asked if 

 equally successful, why is not the cross fox as common as the red 

 fox. We can answer that we have no evidence to show that the 

 cross fox is shorter lived, less vigorous, or less well able to catch 

 food than the vrA fox, or that it is in greater danger from its 

 enemies. The reason why it is less common is purely and simply 

 determined by laws of heredity, which govern the numerical re- 

 lationship which a 'sport' hears to the parent stock, when no 

 artificial factor steps in and provides for 'sports' only, mating 

 together. We disagree absolutely with Mr. Allen's absurd quib- 

 ble that "a very little reflection would have shown ... that no 

 two species ever live under precisely the same conditions." Why 

 not? We believe that very many birds and, indeed, that many 

 animals of all groups live under conditions so near alike that 

 slight differences could not possibly prevent the same biological 

 forces working equally upon all of them. In the matter of color 

 gradation and counter shading, we admit that Mr. Thayer has 

 made great discoveries in optics. Counter shading is certain!} 

 not universally existent. Mrs. Barbour, however, has recently 

 called m\ attention to its frequency among such garden vegetables 

 as melons, cucumbers, gourds and the like and how ineffectually 

 it conceals them. Its effect is certainly destroyed in many in- 



