Page:Territory in Bird Life by Henry Eliot Howard (London, John Murray edition).djvu/309

Rh between different species, the more so since the biological end of securing a mate is definitely excluded. And we have something in the nature of proof of the correctness of this view in the fact that she accompanies her mate when he joins the flock, and that there his instinct is not susceptible to stimulation. We then proceeded to examine certain cases in which all the indications pointed to the fact that the "will to fight" was present in only one of the opponents; and we attached considerable importance to this circumstance, because we knew from experience that the same bird which seemed to lack courage, could at other times and in other situations be most aggressive. If then we ask what condition was present on the one occasion that was absent on the other, we have no difficulty in finding a reply—on every occasion on which the opponents appeared to be unevenly matched, one was in occupation of a territory and the other was not. And if we inquire further as to which of the two was the aggressor, the answer is again clear, namely, the bird that occupied a territory. Finally we considered some particular instances in which the "will to fight" was present alike in both opponents, and in which the battles were protracted and severe.

But the fact that a bird has established a territory is riot in itself sufficient to render its hostile nature susceptible; it must be actually in occupation if a response is to be elicited. We reach this conclusion step by step: the