230 THE ZOOLOGIST. 



those influencing Homo sapiens. To my mind the male Yellow 

 Wagtail is a remarkably beautiful bird, both from the purity of its 

 colour and because of the unusual grace of its outlines ; in the Grey 

 Wagtail, it will be remembered, although the- yellow is more delicate 

 — shall we say primrose as compared with the daffodil of M. raii ? — ■ 

 the disproportionately long tail quite destroys the balance of the 

 design of form. 



When parading before the female, either on the ground or hovering 

 just above her head, the male Yellow Wagtail puffs out his plumage 

 until the feathers are on end and the colour lost, and the beautiful 

 outlines entirely vanished. Now, if we agree that to human eyes the 

 Yellow Wagtail is beautiful, we are bound to admit that when he 

 wishes to attract the attention of the female he makes himself 

 ?m-beautiful. The bird in an ordinary frame of mind is totally diffe- 

 rent in outward appearance to the same individual when under the 

 influence of sex. We cannot have two standards of beauty here : 

 one must be handsomer than the other ; and I can explain my pre- 

 ference by describing the fine yellow of the sleek-plumaged bird and 

 the harmonious design of its outlines. Under the empire of love he 

 makes himself ugly, according to my standard. The way out is 

 simple — we can refuse to accept these popular views on animal 

 aesthetics until at least one example has been definitely proved. 



The case of the Bullfinch can be described here, for I think it 

 must be new to ornithological literature. The song of the male, I 

 might explain for those who have not heard it, is a peculiar splutter- 

 ing whisper that is inaudible at more than a very few feet ; indeed, 

 only by the rarest of chances do we hear the full song in the fields, so 

 low are some of its details. The males collect in small parties in early 

 spring, and sing in concert. 



Many birds (Sandpiper, Golden Plover, &c.) string their call-notes 

 together in the form of a loud warbling song, but most birds appear 

 to keep the two voices separate. In the Thrush, for example, the 

 song is far louder than the call, and this is a useful fact for those who 

 see a challenge or a signal in bird song. In the Bullfinch, as I have 

 found by many experiments, the call-note is at the very least four 

 times as loud as the song. If the bird desires to call the females, or 

 to drown the voices of its rivals, why does it not use a repetition of 

 its ringing "hoop"? So far as we can see, the uttering of the call- 

 note needs little physical effort ; yet the singing bird is trembling 

 with what certainly appears to be suppressed muscular effort. Dr. 

 Stolzman and Dr. A. E. Wallace long ago held song to be nothing 



