PURPOSELESS HERITAGES 35 



numbers of animals flaunt glaring hues in the 

 face of danger. If the thrush is protected by its 

 speckled plumage, how has the blackbird survived 

 alongside it ? The brilliant colours, the singing 

 capacities, of some cock birds are ascribed to 

 sexual selection to the advantages which these 

 give the cocks in finding mates. They doubtless 

 afford pleasure to the females ; but this does not 

 prove that they owe their existence to their 

 attractiveness. Is the taste of man responsible 

 for the vagaries of female fashion ? Moreover, it 

 is difficult to suppose that females are attracted 

 by the small eccentricities in which, on the 

 Darwinian hypothesis, these excellencies origin- 

 ated. The colours of certain flowers may attract 

 fertilizing insects ; but there are brilliant flowers 

 that must fertilize themselves. Of what use are 

 the flashing colours that embellish the chrysalides 

 of many butterflies, the long beaks and tails of 

 many tropical birds, the horns of female reindeer 

 and cattle, the hair which some races of men grow 

 on their faces ? In truth Life is not logical or 

 frugal in its activities, and we owe to its unstinted 

 prodigality of change much of that which is 

 beautiful in the world. 



We must then admit that the varieties of form 

 and colour which distinguish the species of plants 

 and animals have proceeded in great measure 

 from a capricious changefulness which is inherent 

 in Life. But are we to believe that changes are 

 in no case purposeful that the influence of 

 environment, habit or culture may not stimulate 

 variation which is so far purposeful that it is 

 directed to an end ? Beyond a doubt organisms 

 are influenced in colour by their surroundings, 

 and also in form, if only by such artificial mutila- 

 tions as shorten the tails of puppies. But these 

 changes would be of no progressive value unless 



