COMMOX ShWSI-: AM) AM MM. ( o/.i )I:a Tlo.X 



13 



iiK'tricallv oppdsi'il" to tlir fiicts lie li;is mammals. The lads as rej^ards tlu'se 



noted about reef fishes, ami imlecd is arc so olivioiis that any man of common 



"so inconsistent" with what he has oh- sense must realize them, if he wislies to 



served ahout one lish that "fuller com- translate his theory into action. To 



ment is unnecessary." In other wdnis, deny them htands literally on m jmr 



heeaus<> I'rofessor Loii>rley linds. or with denying: that two and two make 



thinks he timls. that jiroteel ivc eolora- four, or that a strai«,dit line is the .-hnrt- 



tion is (d' eoneealiny valu(> to certain est distance hetween two points, 

 coral reef lishes when in motion, there- NO man can successfully shoot ducks, 



f(»re he takes the position that this oh- no man can successfully hunt hi«j; orame, 



servation on a small nundier of lishes without treating as axiomatic the fact 



necessarily proves that motion does not that suddtMi motion on the part of the 



reveal protect ively colored animals <fen- liiiiilcr. if in view of his (piarrv will 



I'tariuigun in summer and iii winter plumiige, t.vpe.s ot concealing coloration 



erally I Because in a very small field 

 he believes that he has found a rule to 

 obtain, he believes it must obtain every- 

 where. To use his own words, it would 

 be impossible to take a more "wholly 

 illogical" and therefore a more utterly 

 unscientific position than this. More- 

 over, as to birds and mammals, and cer- 

 tainly as to most (and probably as to 

 all) land reptiles and batrachians. Pro- 

 fessor Longley is in actual fact wrong 

 and the naturalists whom he criticises 

 are right. In my articles to which he 

 refers, I state that I am dealing only 

 with birds and mammals, and Dewar 

 and Finn^ deal mainlv Avith birds and 



' Thf Makinp of Siierieg. By DoukIhs Dewar 

 and Frank Finn. J. Lane. London and New Yorlc. 



warn it, no matter what color his cloth- 

 ing may be. Professor Longley appar- 

 ently thinks that this is treated as "ob- 

 vious" without attempt to test it by 

 trial; the real fact is that the trial test 

 invariably and instantly establishes the 

 fact to any human being of the small- 

 est intelligence, so that thereafter he 

 accepts it as being "obvious" in the 

 same sense that it is "obvious" that if 

 a chair is w uhdrawn from under a man 

 who is sitting down he will fall to the 

 floor— really, it is about as absurd to 

 argue on behalf of one position as on 

 behalf of the other. But, if Professor 

 Longley must have "proof" of the obvi- 

 ous, I will explain that I have ap- 

 jiroached and observed many thousands 



