CARIACUS VI RGINIANUS. 
tage, and enabled him to propagate his peculiarity. His descend- 
ants, having a like advantage, have propagated the peculiarity in a 
constantly increasing ratio, till they are slowly crowding the antlered 
Deer from the region they inhabit.’’ * 
The foregoing note contains several inaccuracies of statement, 
and the writer’s deductions are wholly erroneous. It was very justly 
criticised by Mr. W. J. Hays in the Naturalist for May, 1870 (pp. 
188-189). Further remarks and discussions may be found in the 
same Journal, vol. IV, pp. 442-443, 762-763; and vol. V, pp. a 5 o- 
25 1. The subject is now well understood, and the Hon. judge Caton 
has presented the facts of the case with such accuracy and concise- 
ness that I cannot do better than transcribe his own words: 
“ It has long been a prevalent opinion among hunters, and to some 
extent has been adopted by naturalists, that a race of common Deer, 
the adults of which have antlers without branches, have established 
themselves in the northeastern part of the United States and in Can- 
ada, whence they are driving out the prong-antlered bucks. 
“This is a matter of the greatest scientific importance, and I have 
taken pains to investigate it to my satisfaction, and am entirely con- 
vinced that it is a popular error, founded upon incomplete observa- 
tions. The spike bucks found in the Adirondacks are all yearling 
bucks with their first antlers. The universal testimony, so far as I 
have been able to gather it, is, that they are smaller than the average 
of the prong-antlered bucks, and that their spikes vary in length 
* The above passage fell under the ever-searching eye of that eminent naturalist and indefatiga- 
ble collector of facts, the late and much lamented Charles Darwin, whose massive intellect and 
exhaustive researches have revolutionized Natural Science and mark a new era in the progress of 
knowledge. Mr. Darwin, misled by this account, part of which he quotes in his masterly work on 
the Descent of Man, remarks upon it as follows : “A critic has well objected to this account by 
asking, why, if the simple horns are now so advantageous, were the branched antlers of the parent- 
form ever developed? To this I can only answer by remarking, that a new mode of attack with 
new weapons might be a great advantage, as shown by the case of the Ovis cycloceros , who thus 
conquered a domestic ram famous for his fighting power. Though the branched antlers of a stag 
are well adapted for fighting with his rivals, and though it might be an advantage to the prong- 
horned variety slowly to acquire long and branched horns, if he had to fight only with others of the 
same kind, yet it by no means follows that branched horns would be the best fitted for conquering 
a foe differently armed.” (Descent of Man, New York, 1875, p. 513.) 
