1878.] Doctrine of Development . 451 
of cases doubtless are, correlated with intensity of colour. 
But, if so, it is persistency and energy, rather than mere 
beauty, to which success is due. Three eminent breeders 
of poultry — Messrs. Hewitt, Tegetmeier, and Brent — in- 
formed Mr. Darwin that they “ did not believe that the 
females prefer certain males on account of the beauty of 
their plumage.” Mr. Tegetmeier is convinced that “ a 
game cock, though disfigured by being dubbed and with his 
hackles trimmed, would be accepted as readily as a male 
retaining all his natural ornaments.” Old hens, and those 
of a pugnacious disposition, as Mr. Darwin states, quoting 
Mr. Brent, “ dislike strange males, and will not yield until 
well beaten into compliance ” — certainly a curious kind of 
“ Female Selection.” Mr. Darwin himself admits that, 
“ as a general rule, colour appears to have little influence 
upon the pairing of pigeons.” The case of the hen canary 
“ who chose for her mate a greenfinch, in preference to 
either chaffinch or goldfinch,” also tells against Mr. Darwin’s 
hypothesis. Nor is the instance of Sir R. Heron’s peahens 
more fortunate. If these birds preferred a pied cock to one 
normally coloured their conduct was a strange anomaly, 
because, as Mr. Wallace remarks, “ pied birds are just 
those that are not favoured in a state of Nature, or the 
breeds of wild animals would become as varied and mottled 
as our domestic varieties.” But if there is no sufficient evi- 
dence that female birds in the choice of mates are influenced 
by the beauty of the opposite sex, the case is still more 
decided as regards butterflies. Here the males surpass the 
most splendid male birds at once in brilliance of colouration 
and in elegance of pattern, whilst the females in a multitude 
of cases are comparatively plain and obscure. Yet there is 
no evidence to prove that the female is at all influenced by 
this beauty, “ or even that she has any power of choice.” 
Mr. Darwin himself can find no more satisfactory argument 
than the following : — “ Unless the female prefer one male 
to another the pairing must be left to mere chance, and this 
does not appear probable.” Yet we observe the males fight 
and jostle each other in pursuit of a female, who submits 
herself with indifference to the victor. Mr. Darwin admits 
that in the case of the silk-moths “ the females appear not 
to evince the least choice in regard to their partners.” 
Would not the same rule be found to hold good with any 
other Lepidopterous inseCt, if only observed as extensively ? 
Here, as among birds, “ the most vigorous and energetic, 
the strongest winged, or the most persevering, wins the 
objeCt of his pursuit.” Mr. Wallace adds that “ Natural 
2 G 2 
