A REPLY TO HAECKEL. HV 



composition of substances than any three of 

 his contemporaries. 



But much confusion has been wrought, hy- 

 men of undisputed authority in their own 

 field, pronouncing positive verdicts in depart- 

 ments where their opinions had no value. 

 What a great composer has to say about the 

 value of a certain note must be respectfully 

 considered as being of importance, but, un- 

 less he has studied geology, his opinions on 

 the probable origin or age of the Rocky Moun- 

 tains will have no more value, and may have 

 less than those of the policeman on the near- 

 est corner. 



An excellent example of the confusion 

 which may arise in this way, was given to 

 the world in 1877, at the Congress of Natur- 

 alists held at Munich in September of that 

 year. At that time the naturalists of Europe 

 were divided into two opposing camps, one 

 accepting and the other rejecting the Darwin- 

 ian theory of "natural selection.'' The leaders 

 of both divisions were Germans, though a 

 preponderance of the Germans favored Dar- 

 win, whilst the French, still under the influ- 

 ence of, or agreeing with, Flourens, although 

 he had been dead a decade, were almost 

 unanimously opposed. 



The honors of leading the fight for Darwin- 



