1890 LECTUEESHIP AT EDINBUKGH 185 



This new theory roused the public interest (so far 

 as the scientific public were concerned) and produced 

 much criticism. 



There is a scientific orthodoxy as well as a theo- 

 logical orthodoxy ' plus loyal que le roi,' and by the 

 ultra-Darwinians Mr. Romanes was regarded as 

 being strongly tainted with heresy. 



The ' Times ' devoted a leader in August 1886 to 

 the theory, and the president of Section D at the 

 British Association at Bath in the same month also 

 criticised it. 



A sharp discussion took place in the columns of 

 1 Nature,' and it is characteristic of those who took the 

 chief part in this controversy that their friendly 

 relations remained undisturbed. Mr. Wallace criti- 

 cised the theory in the ' Fortnightly,' and Mr. 

 Romanes wrote an article in the ' Nineteenth Century ' 

 describing his beliefs on the subject. This theory was 

 very close to his heart, and perhaps no part of his work 

 was left unfinished with more keen regret. 



He planned a course of experiments on plants in 

 an alpine garden which, through the kindness of M. 

 Correvon, Professor of Botany at Geneva, he was able 

 to begin on a plot of ground near Bourg St. Pierre, on 

 the great St. Bernard. 



Other work diverted him a good deal from this, 

 but Mr. Romanes had always large plans of work, 

 looking forward through a course of years. 



There were some experiments on the power dogs 

 possess of tracking by scent, in the autumn of 1886. 



With this year came the appointment to a Lec- 

 tureship in the University of Edinburgh on ' The 

 Philosophy of Natural History.' 1 This lectureship 



1 Through the kindness of Lord Eosebery. 



