The Birds of India. 
67 
means of natural selection we must be able to explain the utilit}' to the 
organism of the character in question in its initial staj^e, and at each sub- 
sequent stage of its development. It is not sufficient to show that the 
character in its final and complete stage is of use to its possessor. This is 
an important point, which biologists, especially neo-Darwinians, frequently 
seem to forget. 
The Hlack-and-yellow Grosbeak [Pycnorliainphus icteroides), a bird 
common in many parts of the Himalayas, resembles the Black-headed 
Oriole nearly as closely as the Diongo-cuckoo does the King-crow. But 
since the Grosbeak does not descend to the plains, and the Black-headed 
Oriole (Orioliis inela?iocephalus) does not ascend the hills, neither can 
possil)ly derive any benefit from the resemblance, which it should be added, 
extends only to the cocks. Thus there is here 110 question of mimicry. 
Another Indian cuckoo, the famous Brain-fever Bird (Hierococcyx 
varins). displays a remarkable likeness to the Sliikra (Asiiir badiiis), a 
sparrow-hawk very common in India. This is said to be a case of miniicr)-, 
because the cuckoo is supposed to derive profit from ihe lesemblance. The 
Babblers [Crateiopus canorus), which it victimises, are said to misiake it for 
a Shikra, flee in terror from it, and so give it the opportunity it reqiures to 
gain access to their nests. It is quite likely that the cuckoo does derive 
benefit from the resemblance. But this is not sufficient to explain a like- 
ness, which is so faithful as to extend to the marking of each individual 
feather. When a Bal)bler espies a hawk-like bird, il does not wait to in- 
spect each feather before fleeing in terror; hence all that is nece.ssary to the 
cuckoo is that it should bear a general resemblance to the Shikra. The 
fact that the likeness extends to minute details in feather marking points 
to the fact that in each case identical causes have operated to produce this 
type of plumage. 
Walt.acki.SM. 
It is thus obvious that the problem of evolution is far more complex 
than Wallace and Weismann would have us believe. Since their doctrine is 
vpidely accepted in P^ngland to-day, and is inculcated by Professor Poulton 
at Oxford, I have, in touching upon the study of the birds of India in its 
scientific aspect, thought fit to bring together a few facts which seemed to 
show that the Neo-Darwinism is untenable. I would add that I went out 
to India imbued with the teaching of Wallace, anil have abandoned it with 
reluctance, owing to the many facts opposed to it that have forced them- 
selves upon my notice in that country. I am not attacking the doctrine of 
natural selection, for I believe that selection is an important factor in the 
genesis of species. It is to the views of Wallace and Weismann, who have 
out-I)aru ined Darwin, that I am compelled to take exception. It seems to 
me that Dr. Wallace preaches, not Darwinism, but Wallaceisni, which is a 
very different thing. 
(To be continued.) 
