roductive, and their flesh the most
proper for invalids.[509] In Guiana, as I am informed by Sir R. Schomburgk,
the aborigines will not eat the flesh or eggs of the fowl, but two {210}
races are kept distinct merely for ornament. In the Philippines, no less
than nine sub-varieties of the game cock are kept and named, so that they
must be separately bred.

At the present time in Europe, the smallest peculiarities are carefully
attended to in our most useful animals, either from fashion, or as a mark
of purity of blood. Many examples could be given, two will suffice. "In the
Western counties of England the prejudice against a white pig is nearly as
strong as against a black one in Yorkshire." In one of the Berkshire
sub-breeds, it is said, "the white should be confined to four white feet, a
white spot between the eyes, and a few white hairs behind each shoulder."
Mr. Saddler possessed "three hundred pigs, every one of which was marked in
this manner."[510] Marshall, towards the close of the last century, in
speaking of a change in one of the Yorkshire breeds of cattle, says the
horns have been considerably modified, as "a clean, small, sharp horn has
been _fashionable_ for the last twenty years."[511] In a part of Germany
the cattle of the Race de Gfoehl are valued for many good qualities, but
they must have horns of a particular curvature and tint, so much so that
mechanical means are applied if they take a wrong direction; but the
inhabitants "consider it of the highest importance that the nostrils of the
bull should be flesh-coloured, and the eyelashes light; this is an
indispensable condition. A calf with blue nostrils would not be purchased,
or purchased at a very low price."[512] Therefore let no man say that any
point or character is too trifling to be methodically attended to and
selected by breeders.

* * * * *

_Unconscious Selection._--By this term I mean, as already more than once
explained, the preservation by man of the most valued, and the destruction
of the least valued individuals, without any conscious intention on his
part of altering the breed. It is difficult to offer direct proofs of the
results which follow from this kind of selection; but the indirect evidence
is abundant. In fact, except that in the one case man acts intentionally,
and in the other unintentionally, there is little difference between {211}
methodical and unconscious selection. In both cases man prese