SECONDARY SEXUAL DIFFERENCES 197 



which I think no theory of evolution is sufficient to 

 explain. 



The horns of deer offer special difficulties. The 

 males alone possess horns. If they have been evolved 

 by natural selection alone, and have been preserved 

 because they are useful then they ought to have been 

 developed by the females also which live under like 

 conditions. The fact, however, that the females have 

 survived along with the males shows that the horns 

 are probably of no use in preserving the species, 

 which is the great purpose served by natural selection. 



The survival of females without horns shows that 

 males might have survived equally well without them. 

 We cannot therefore assume that they have been pre- 

 served because of their utility. 



If it is claimed that they have been preserved and 

 evolved on account of combat between the stags 

 themselves, I think it evident that in their rudimen- 

 tary condition for many generations they would have 

 been useless for combat. Besides, if evolved, they 

 must for a long time have been simple horns without 

 prongs. The fact that the horns of young deer have 

 no prongs shows, according to the claims of embry- 

 ology, that the first stags' horns were simple. If this 

 were so, why did they not remain simple? 



Mr. Darwin says: "Although the horns of stags 

 are efficient weapons, there can, 1 think, be no doubt 

 that a single point would have been much more dan- 

 gerous than a branched antler; and Judge Caton, 

 who has had large experience with deer, fully concurs 

 in this conclusion. Nor do the branching horns, 

 though highly important as a means of defense against 

 rival stags, appear perfectly well adapted for this pur- 

 pose, as they are liable to become interlocked. The 

 suspicion has therefore crossed my mind that they 



