NATURAL SELECTION CRITICISED. 3 1 1 



iXirwin must always reason through the conjectural 

 stories which he imaginatively gives himself to tell. 

 But may we not also, equally imaginatively, conjecture 

 some very different issue, or even a score of such ? 

 Even as Mr. Darwin tells the story, it would be the 

 " enemy," the " beast of prey," that would be advantaged 

 as warned not to make an attack where it would 

 certainly only be injured. But to take it reverse-wise 

 it is, Mr. Darwin tells us, an " enemy " that is con- 

 cerned. Well, what enemy that knew by its rattle 

 where its " prey " was, and could come upon it by 

 surprise and in the dark, would magnanimously consent 

 to spare it till daylight, when it itself (the " enemy ") 

 would necessarily have all against it which it had then 

 and there for it ? Really, when would Mr. Darwin 

 wish us to suppose that this particular " enemy " seeks 

 this particular " prey " ? For, of course, the porcupine 

 is like the rest, wholly in the drift of the struggle 

 for life. 



We have to bear in mind, too, that, while the 

 porcupine is in itself a very harmless, vegetable-feeding 

 animal, it is only at night that its enemy is likely to fall 

 in with it, for it is hidden asleep in its impregnably 

 defended subterranean fortress during the day. The 

 rattle " a great advantage in the dark ! " Why, but for 

 its rattle, would it not be most likely altogether to escape 

 its " enemy " in the dark ? And yet to Mr. Darwin it is 

 precisely for this " great advantage to them in the dark " 

 that " porcupines have been provided, through the modifi- 

 cation of their protective spines, with this special sound- 

 producing instrument " an advantage which, as it turns 

 out, can stead it in the second place only by steading its 

 enemy infinitely more in the first place. 1 



1 It is worth pointing out that here, even to Mr. Darwin, a pro- 

 vision in one animal ia certainly for the advantage of another. 



