flycatcher flutters two streamers a foot long, like white ribbons,
behind it. The fantail could hide behind its own fan. The bee-eater has
the two central feathers prolonged and pointed. The drongos, which are
flycatchers in habit, wear their tails very long and deeply forked; and
one of them, the racket-tailed drongo, has the two side feathers
extended beyond the rest for nearly a foot, and as thin as wires,
expanding into a blade at the ends. I have seen nothing in ladies' hats
more preposterous. It is vain to object that there can be no proper
comparison between tails and hats because the woman chooses her own hat
while the bird has to wear what Nature has given it. I know that, but
the contention is utterly superficial. What choice has a woman as to the
style of her hat? Fashion prescribes for her, and Nature for the birds;
that is all the difference. No doubt she acquiesces when theoretically
she might rebel. The bird cannot rebel, but does it not acquiesce? Does
a lyre bird submit to its tail--wear it under protest, so to speak?
Believe me, every bird that has an aesthetic tail knows the fact, and
tries to live up to it. We may push the argument even further, for the
motmot of Brazil is not content with a ready-made tail, but actually
strips the web off the two long side feathers with its own beak, except
a little patch at the end, so as to get the pattern which Nature, if one
must use the phrase, gave to the racket-tailed drongo. A specimen is
exhibited in the hall of the South Kensington Museum.

[Illustration: A BLACKBIRD AND A STARLING--THE ONE LIFTS ITS SKIRTS,
WHILE THE OTHER WEARS A WALKING DRESS.]

In this connection I may also say that the shape or colour of a tail is
not everything. An observant eye may find much to note in the wearing of
them. There is a stylish way of carrying a tail and a slovenly way, and
there are coquettish arts for the display of recherche tails. A