282 PHILOSOPHY OF ZOOLOGY, 
a wood-lark linnet, (a linnet with the song of the wood-lark,) 
which was full in song, and hung very near to him for a 
month together; after which, the robin was removed to 
another house, where he could only hear a sky-lark linnet. 
The consequence was, that the nestling did not sing a note 
of woodlark, (though I afterwards hung him again just 
above the wood-lark linnet,) but adhered entirely to the 
song of the sky-lark linnet.” 
If birds thus acquire so easily, in a state of confinement, 
the song of others, how comes it to pass that, in a wild state, 
each individual acquires only the notes of its own species ? 
Even in a state of confinement, young birds imitate the notes 
of those of their own species more readily than those of any 
other bird. The same observer, to whom we have already 
alluded, says, “* Young Canary birds are frequently reared 
in a room where there are many other sorts; and yet I 
have been informed that they only learn the song of the 
parent cock.” Even in a wild state, although the twite 
and linnet fly in company, ‘ yet these two species of birds 
never learn each other’s notes.” The same may be said 
of many other birds which live in the same place, and 
nestle im the same hedge. These circumstances probably 
arise from the structure of the organs of each species 
enabling them more easily to produce the notes of their 
own species than those of any other, and from the 
notes of their own species being more agreeable to their 
ears. These conditions, jomed to the facility of hear- 
mg the song of their own species, im consequence of fre- 
quenting the same places, determine the character of the 
acquired language of the feathered tribes. We are even 
disposed to conclude, that an individual untutored, and 
without an example to imitate, would, if associated with a 
mate in the breeding season, acquire, by its own efforts, 
notes nearly similar to those of its parent. This is, indeed, 
partly proven by the song of solitary birds, in certain cases, 
