186 



The Naturalist. 



And we all know that numberless objects exist, and have existed and 

 perished, that never met or shall meet the eye of man. Consideration 

 will, I think, produce the conviction that such a theory is most 

 improbable. We are thus led to the conclusion that beauty is the 

 result of intellect. We will next consider how this theory is 

 strengthened by further considerations. 



To return to our late subject, the development of beauty in Lepi- 

 doptera. Darwin shows that in this order brilliancy of colour not 

 only occurs in the perfect insect, but frequently in the caterpillar. 

 Sexual selection is of course here entirely out of the question. His 

 explanation is that those caterpillars which exhibit these brilliant 

 colours have a nauseous taste, and birds do not care to consume 

 them. Their colour serves to distinguish them from other cater- 

 pillars which are more palatable to the birds, and thus acts as a 

 protection. Now, both in the case of the butterfly and the caterpillar 

 the colours are not only bright, but of a most refined character, and 

 there are also shadings, lines, rings, ^c, most tastefully arranged ; 

 and since it is scarcely credible that the female butterfly can 

 appreciate such niceties, and since the caterpillars would be as well 

 protected by any colour, however gross and glaring, whilst lines, 

 circles, &c., seem to be absolutely useless to it, we must conclude that 

 though the theory of selection explains much, it does not in this case 

 cover all the fscts. But indeed the theory necessarily implies that 

 there is a constant tendency in the species affected to produce the 

 bright colours, and that natural or sexual selection, as the case may 

 be, merely takes advantage of this tendency. Here we see both these 

 agencies at work, and in each case the delicate shadings and markings 

 and refinement of colour appear. These markings are also found in 

 some chrysalises. 



Here, I think, we derive strong support for our views. 



It is also well supported by analogy, for the arguments I have 

 been using can be equally applied to such principles as order, unity 

 in diversity, &c., which can be appreciated and admired by the human 

 intellect, but which have been placed in nature by another agency. 



Objection may be taken on the ground that man's sense of beauty 

 is variable. As shown by Darwin, it varies widely in different 

 individuals and different races, but as this variation can only take 

 place within certain limits, I do not think the objection very important. 

 No sane person would declare the star-lit sky to be repulsive, or find 

 beauty say in an ordinary locomotive waggon. 



The fact that our esthetic taste is not fixed may account for the 



