134 
Mr. Walter Gilbey points out that the breeder of horses has 
to look chiefly to his sales to repay him for his trouble, and 
draws the inference that a horse, to be valuable, must be 
good looking. “This,” says Mr. James Long, “is very true. 
There are plenty of useful slaves—horses which owners 
would hardly part with at any price, and which have no 
appearance to recommend them. But the buyer is only 
guided by what he sees, and, especially in horses, he will 
seldom take any word of recommendation from a stranger. 
Good looks are absolutely essential.” But it must not be 
supposed that the principle of utility can therefore be 
ignored. No sensible man would buy a good-looking 
horse that was good for nothing else but to be admired— 
unless it were to sell again. How the principle of utility 
and taste co-operate is seen from what Mr. Gilbey further 
says :—“There are thousands of moneyed men who demand 
safety as a sine qua non. Give them good temper and 
safe legs, and you may ask your own price for a good- 
looking animal.”* 
There is, however, another kind of selection practised 
by man, in which the principle of utility altogether dis 
appears, and the object which the experimenter proposes 
to himself is to produce an animal which shall realise 
the idea which he has formed in his own mind, which 
shall correspond to his conception of what is beautiful, 
or which shall in some way or other gratify his fancy. 
Hence, while we speak of the cattl^.-breeder, we talk of 
the pigeon -fancier. The process is as follows. First, 
the fancier pictures to himself an ideal form—an image 
which exists only in his own mind. Then he sets to work 
to modify a given organism till it resembles his ideal. If 
necessary, his first step is to produce the greatest quantity 
Mr. James Long. Farm Notes, Manchester Guardian, Dec. 2Çth, 1887.