98 RELATIONS WITH LOEW AFTER MY RETURN TO EUROPE 
finished on January 11. Since September, he had spent some 
time in the country, and felt strengthened. I reproduce (in trans¬ 
lation) the end of the letter : — 
“ To what I have said, I shall add nothing, for fear of making it still 
more confused. That I am going down-hill rapidly, you will easily per¬ 
ceive. The sad consequence of it is, that all my scientific correspondence 
begins to lag, and that all communion with friends becomes more rare; in a 
word, a solitude, intellectual and emotional, is forming around me; I ex¬ 
perience a painful longing for a change, and, if possible, for an improvement. 
It is in the midst of such a state of depression that I beg you soon to cheer 
me with an answer, and with friendly advice about the disposal of my col¬ 
lection. In old and sincere devotion, ever yours, H. Loew.” 
Two or three more letters were exchanged between me (from 
Heidelberg) and Loew (from Guben). He discussed some ento¬ 
mological matters, especially in a letter of his, dated February 12, 
1878, which is rather long and nevertheless quite coherent. Loew 
complained of the chaotic state of contemporaneous dipterology, and 
attributed it to two causes : (1) The confusion of the System, and 
(2) the isolation of dipterologists, who have gradually formed “ab- 
geschlossene Landmannschaften ” (isolated corporations), each one 
following a separate nomenclature, etc.; a “ Babel-like confusion 
of languages is the rule, and the collapse of the great tower of 
Babel seems to be impending.” Loew throws out a hint I should 
undertake the part of a mediator. The next and last letter shows 
a lamentable deterioration. It is dated April 21, 1878, a year, day 
for day, before Loew’s end. It is written under dictation, and 
signed by the tremulous hand of Loew. The portion of it which 
concerns the Amber Diptera work, I have reproduced in my Chap¬ 
ter IX ; the rest of the letter treats principally of the chances of 
selling his European collection. Of his literary remains of which 
he had made mention in his letter of August 10-14, 1877 (compare 
above, p. 97), he never spoke to me again, either during our last 
interview in Guben (September, 1877), or in any of his subsequent 
letters. If lie had entertained for a moment the idea of instituting 
me his literary executor, he must have abandoned it afterwards. 
For this reason, after his demise, I felt that I had neither the right 
nor the duty to inquire about his manuscripts. 
