ARTIFICIAL FISH. 57 



transparent. In fact, the bad imitation of the 

 May -fly that had been taken by the Thames trout 

 was not unlike the living fly that was then out 

 upon the waters of that river. 



If fish preferred nondescript artificial flies, I 

 may reasonably conclude they would prefer non- 

 descript natural fish, mice, frogs, beetles, grass- 

 hoppers, and so forth. They do not, however; 

 and artificial fish are made as like as possible to 

 natural minnows, bleak, gudgeons, dace, roach, 

 and small trout. Perhaps the philosophers would 

 contend that an artificial imitation of the red 

 mullet, or of some other fish that would be a non- 

 descript to salmonidse or pike, would be taken by 

 them with greater avidity than the bad imitation 

 of the fish they feed upon, because, and that is the 

 philosophers' reason, they can distinguish the badly 

 imitated artificial minnow or gudgeon from the 

 real ones they constantly see and feed upon, and 

 will therefore seize by preference something that 

 must be foreign to their instinct. 



Before I conclude this chapter, I think it but 

 fair to the philosophers to give a summary of their 

 theory. It is the opinion of governments and of 

 other bodies of men, that it is dangerous to pub- 

 lish false theories. I do not think so. Falsehood 

 cannot stand against truth in the open day. It 

 may creep on in private, but its publication draws 

 after it its refutation, and the establishment of 



