216 
without the somewhat of bitter in it would seem insipid 
and worthless ; of which developed taste the lovers 
of high game may be taken as a familiar illustration. 
Mr. Poulton remarks that,— 
“ The acquisition of an unpleasant taste or smell, together with a 
conspicuous appearance, is so simple a mode of protection, and yet 
apparently so absolutely complete, that it seems remarkable that 
more species have not availed themselves of it.” 
He accounts for this by the assertion that the antagonistic 
principle is to be found in— 
“ The too complete success of the method ; for if a very common 
insect forming the chief food of some animal gained protection in 
this way, the latter might be forced to devour the unpalatable food 
in order to avoid starvation ; (and if compelled to persevere through 
the want of other food,) would gradually come to devour it with 
relish.” 
He supports this argument by a very interesting fact:— 
“ There is an entire disappearance of all insects with warning 
colours during the seasons when insect life is scarce and when insect 
eating animals are hard pressed for food. And yet, if it were safe 
to rely on such a mode of defence, the warning colours would be 
especially conspicuous at these times, when all the tints of nature are 
sombre.” But these creatures disappear—they hide themselves—and 
in the absence of other food they are eaten.—(The Colours of 
Animals, pp. 178-80.) 
The inference to be drawn from the above consideration 
is surely not favourable to the idea that an animal which 
has a certain disability will not be eaten on that account, 
and that a warning colour is a sufficient protection from 
attack. 
We have endeavoured to show that the assumptions 
on which the theory is based are not to be relied on. 
Organic colour is not necessarily useful in all cases. 
There is not a constant correlation between conspicuous 
colour and some disability from the insect-eater’s point of