WCP1737

[1]

Frith Hill, Godalming.

Nov[embe]^r. 18th, 1884

Stolzmann’s¹ paper on Sexual Dimorphism²

Dear D^r. Sclater,

I have read this paper with much interest. It criticizes Darwin’s theory of sexual selection by examples means of cases among S[outh]. American birds, and then proceeds to explain how the diverse sexual colours of birds may have been produced. The suggested explanation is very original, and as bearing on me of the most difficult and most contested points in the theory of Nat[ural]. Select[ion]. deserves to be made public. I am inclined [2] to think that there may be something in it, & that, taken in connection with the suggestions I have myself made, it will go far to solve the very difficult problem of the sexual differences in birds & insects.

It depends however on an asserted fact — that in birds the members of the males are much greater that of the females. The evidence adduced does not seem at all to prove the fact, since it depends on the proportion [3] of the sexes collected, & we know that in many species the males are chiefly sought after and are also more easy to shoot from their superior conspicuousness. There are some other doubtful statements in the paper, — but the view that males, if in superabundance, are injurious to the species in many ways, & that the colors ^{and ornamentations} in them are developed by nat[ural]. select[ion]. in order to keep down their numbers is original & ingenious & worth careful consideration [4] and further enquiry.

I think the paper sh[oul]^d be published, — or rather a translation of it in order to secure a greater number of readers.

Yours very truly | Alfred R. Wallace [signature]