16 b* sexual selection: bikds. PAltI 
We are led to a nearly similar conclusion "'h 
respect to the length of the tail in (he various s P eC !., 
of pheasants. In the Eared pheasant (Crossop 1 
- - 
the cotavf 
auritim ) the tail is of equal length in both seS ‘ 
namely, sixteen or seventeen inches; in the co- 
’ alft 
P 
pheasant it is about twenty inches long in the 10,1 
and twelve in the female; in Soemmerring’s phe ®® 9 
thirty-seven inches in the male, and only eight i® . 
female ; and lastly in Eeeve’s pheasant it is someth 
actually seventy-two inches loug in the male and 
teen in the female. Thus in the several specie®* j ( , 
tail of the female differs much in length, irrespect‘ v jv r 
of that of the male ; and this can be accounted 
as it seems to me, with much more probability, hy - v 
laws of inheritance, — that is by the successive v ® ^ 
tions having been from the first more or less cle-^ 
limited in their transmission to the male sex,— tin 1 ® v 
the agency of natural selection, owing to the long'd 1 ^., 
tail having been injurious in a greater or less deg 1 
to the females of the several species. 
Wo may now consider Mr. Wallace’s argument __ 
regard to the sexual coloration of birds. He bel' c ^| 
that the bright tints originally acquired through 
selection by the males, would in all or almost all 
have been transmitted to the females, unless the b 
ference had been checked through natural sel©®^,,; 
I may here remind the reader that various 
bearing on this view have already been given 11 'm., 
l \* te ' 
reptiles, amphibians, fishes, and lepidoptera. 
Wallace rests his belief chiefly, but not exclusive 1 - ’ 
we shall see in the next chapter, on the following 1 
ment , 8 that when both sexes are coloured in a strik 1 ®* 
‘ Journal of Travel,’ edited by A. Murray, vol. i. 186S, !>• 
