Attempt to Suhordinate Protista to CtU-Thcory 285 



knowledge favors the former and tends to refute tlie latter; 

 and in so far as Ehrenbcrg stood for the fonnir and l)u- 

 jardin for the latter the evidence surely supports tlie views 

 of the German and opposes those of tlie Frenchman. 



This brings us to a highly important ])ractical point. I 

 mentioned a little while ago that Dujardin's theoretical 

 views influenced harmfully his observational work. In sup- 

 port of this statement the reader is asked to compare the 

 monographs by Ehrenberg and Dujardin alread}^ mentioned, 

 giving special attention to figures of the same animal j)re- 

 sented in each. No one will fail, I believe, to recognize the 

 greater truthfulness (disregarding the relative merit of 

 draftmanship and publication) of many of Ehrcnberg's il- 

 lustrations, especially as regards the internal structure of 

 the organisms. That the diff'erence cannot be attributed 

 altogether to Ehrenberg's superior ]jowers of observation 

 seems certain from the fact that Dujardin made out numer- 

 ous points about the cilia of various species Avhich were un- 

 known to Ehrenberg. Both Dujardin's observations and his 

 scheme of classification appear to have been largely influ- 

 enced by his sarcode theory: i.e., his theory of structureless- 

 ness. "The numerous genera Avhich one establishes," he 

 says, "in the famil}^ of the monadinians, are distinguished 

 therefore only by the number and position of the locomotor 

 fllaments and by the most habitual form of the bodv and of 

 the appendages." ^ 



Prepossessed by the idea of structural diversity and com- 

 plication in the creatures of the microscopic world, Ehren- 

 berg directed his attention primarily to their internal make- 

 up, described things that do not exist there, and overlooked 

 various external parts. Dujardin, on the other hand, ]:> re- 

 possessed by the idea of internal structurelessness, of homo- 

 geneity, fixed his attention more on the external parts and so 

 was able to surpass Ehrenberg in describing these, hut also 

 to correct various of his opponent's erroneous inter])reta- 



