n Forest with some of its Peculiar Birds." The case is a
"remarkable confirmation of Mr. Darwin's views, that gaily coloured
plumes are developed in the male bird for the purpose of attractive
display."

[103] "Geographical Distribution of Animals," i. 286-7.

[104] "Geographical Distribution," i. 76. The name Lemuria was proposed
by Mr. Sclater for an imaginary submerged continent extending from
Madagascar to Ceylon and Sumatra. Wallace points out that if we confine
ourselves to facts Lemuria is reduced to Madagascar, which he makes a
subdivision of the Ethiopian Region.

[105] H.F. Blandford, "On the Age and Correlations of the Plant-bearing
Series of India and the Former Existence of an Indo-Oceanic Continent"
(_Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc_., 1875, xxxi. 519).

[106] In the _Contemporary Review_ for August, 1873, Mr. George Darwin
wrote an article "On Beneficial Restrictions to Liberty of Marriage." In
the July number of the _Quarterly Review_, 1874, p. 70, in an article
entitled "Primitive Man--Tylor and Lubbock," Mr. Mivart thus referred to
Mr. Darwin's article: "Elsewhere (pp. 424-5) Mr. George Darwin speaks
(1) in an approving strain of the most oppressive laws and of the
encouragement of vice to check population. (2) There is no sexual
criminality of Pagan days that might not be defended on the principles
advocated by the school to which this writer belongs." In the _Quarterly
Review_ for October, 1874, p. 587, appeared a letter from Mr. George
Darwin "absolutely denying" charge No. 1, and with respect to charge No.
2 he wrote: "I deny that there is any thought or word in my essay which
could in any way lend itself to the support of the nameless crimes here
referred to." To the letter was appended a note from Mr. Mivart, in
which he said: "Nothing would have been further from our intention than
to tax Mr. Darwin personally (as he seems to have supposed) with the
advocacy of laws or acts which he saw to be oppressive or vicious. We,
therefore, most willingly accept his disclaimer, and are glad to find
that he does not, in fact, apprehend the full tendency of the doctrines
which he has helped to propagate. Nevertheless, we cannot allow that we
have enunciated a single proposition which is either 'false' or
'groundless.' ... But when a writer, according to his own confession,
comes before the public 'to attack the institution of marriage' ... he
must expect searching criticism; and, without implying that Mr. Darwin