48 THE NATURE OF MATTER 



conservation of energy. Some of Haeckel's clerical critics 

 have recklessly tried to discredit this in itself, but Sir Oliver 

 Lodge knows better. The laws of the constancy of matter 

 and energy are based on so broad an experience that no 

 physicist will allow doubt to be thrown on them. They are, 

 says the latest writer on physics, Mr. W. C. D. Whetham, 

 " two of the most important generalisations ever reached by 

 physical science." Sir Oliver Lodge himself says we have 

 just seen that the recent discoveries leave " the constancy 

 of fundamental matter " intact, and that physicists will not 

 tolerate " any the least departure from the law of the con- 

 servation of energy, when all forms of energy are taken into 

 account " (p. 155). What can he find to say in the way of 

 criticism ? 



We have seen that his unconscious resources are many 

 and peculiar. 1 He has two objections to raise. The first 

 is that Haeckel has not been content with the empirical 

 grounds of these laws, but has represented the laws as 

 "almost axiomatic and self-evident." Haeckel nowhere 

 does anything of the kind. He constantly reminds the 

 reader that they are empirical. In fact, he would make 

 little use of them if they were not. On the other hand, 

 take phrases such as the following : " Whatever really and 

 fundamentally exists must, so far as bare existence is con- 

 cerned, be independent of time can hardly be thought of 



as either going out of existence, or as coming into existence, 



1 It need hardly be said that I am only imputing to him a remarkable 

 negligence and hastiness in studying the distinguished foreign biologist 

 he has set out to attack. 



