292 DAKW1NIANISM. 



really a small matter, and reaches to no distance were it 

 even true. Of course, it anecdotically strikes the com- 

 mon mind ; but is it true ? Are there, then, more such 

 animals white always, or white at times than those 

 of any other colour ? And birds' nests (sometimes so 

 thin that the eggs show through), are they always 

 coloured to suit their situation, or are they not always 

 obvious in tree or hedge, in bush or ivy, to the beast or 

 boy that will a moment look for them ? Nay, the birds 

 themselves if it is the accident of colour that is to 

 give them the advantage the one over the other, why is 

 it that no such advantage shows ? Why is it that birds 

 have literally all the colours of the rainbow ? Ah, but 

 there sexual selection comes in, you say. Well, be it so ; 

 but why should black be the privilege of safety or of 

 beauty, to the blackbird or the crow, while it. is white 

 that similarly advantages the pigeon ? If such and such 

 an animal a hare it may be should be plainly advant- 

 aged in that it is white in winter, why is it that there 

 are still so many that have the disadvantage of being 

 always black ? Why are there so many crows ? Why 

 are there so many blackbirds ? Or why is it that the 

 female blackbird is not a black bird at all, but, on the 

 contrary, only a very plain brown one ? You that are 

 so good for accounting for colours, explain to me about 

 the black of crows, or the black of male and the brown 

 of female blackbirds. Or is the question only indiscreet, 

 and imprudent, as put to an ingenuity that has always 

 a story to tell at any time ? 



But, seriously, why are canaries yellow? Why are 

 larks and starlings spotted ? Why has the robin the 

 red breast that gives him his by-name ? Selection ! 

 there is actually no selection. Neither on the part of 

 nature, nor on the part of sex itself, is there the slightest 

 proof of the necessary limit of selection. For selection, 



