WAYS OF NATURE 



upon a ring plover, the fraud was detected. The 

 plover hammered the shams with her bill "in the 

 most skeptical fashion," and refused to sit down 

 upon them. When two of the bird's own eggs were 

 returned to the nest and left there with two wooden 

 ones, the plover tried to throw out the shams, but 

 failing to do this, " reluctantly sat down and covered 

 good and bad alike." 



Now, can the action of the plover in this case be 

 explained on the theory of instinct alone ? The bird 

 could hardly have had such an experience before. 

 It was offered a counterfeit, and it behaved much 

 as you or I would have done under like conditions, 

 although we have the general idea of counterfeits, 

 which the plover could not have had. Of course, 

 everything that pertains to the nest and eggs of a 

 bird is very vital to it. The bird is wise about these 

 things from instinct. Yet the other birds were easily 

 fooled. We do not know how nearly perfect Mr. 

 Kearton's imitation eggs were, but evidently there 

 was some defect in them which arrested the bird's 

 attention. If the incident does not show powers 

 of reflection in the bird, it certainly shows keen 

 powers of perception; and that birds, and indeed 

 all animals, show varying degrees of this power, 

 is a matter of common observation. I hesitate, 

 therefore, to say that Mr. Kearton's plover showed 

 anything more than very keen instincts. Among 

 our own birds there is only one, so far as I know, 

 228 



