of the Entomological Society of London, December 24, 1903.) This belief 

 I no longer hold. Another is my statement, in the same article, that unshiny, 

 bright monochrome constitutes intrinsically conspicuous coloration. Here I 

 should have omitted the word bright. 



In the same paper, too, I wrote, by a slip of the mind, that animals 

 have totally different sight from ours. On the contrary, everything that we 

 know about this matter points to the opposite belief. What I was trying to 

 say was simply that animals seem to have a different mental attitude toward 

 their sight, since they appear to detect each other more exclusively than we 

 do through perdeiving each other's motion. 



Lastly, in the same paper, I ascribed more importance to butterflies' resem- 

 blance to flowers, as compared to their rendering of scenery, than I now 

 should. A. H. Thayer. 



San Remo, Italy. 

 December 28, 1908. 



LATER NOTES 



Our book having spoken of the Scarlet Tanager as often more conspicuous 

 than dim-colored birds, while we clearly show the concealing-power of red 

 patterns, I add here the clear distinction which I have at last perceived 

 between the arrangement of this bird's red and that of every other species 

 I have observed. It differs from that of the others in this respect: that while 

 its contrast with the black of the wings and tail so far produces the usual 

 ruptive effect, and thus, of course, lessens the bird's distinguishability, the 

 red itself occupies continuously his whole head and body, right round him 

 from top to bottom. 



This gives these parts the full conspicuousness of un-countershaded mono- 

 chrome, and to the red itself it gives the peculiar brilliancy that any bright color 



251 



