VI 



STRAIGHT SEEING AND STRAIGHT 

 THINKING 



A NEWSPAPER correspondent the other day 

 asked me what I meant by truth in natural 

 history. " We know that no two persons see aUke," 

 he said, "or see the same things; behold the dis- 

 agreements in the testimony of eye-witnesses to 

 the same occurrences." "True," I replied; "but 

 when two persons shoot at a mark, they must see 

 alike if they are both to hit the mark, and two wit^ 

 nesses to a murder or a robbery must agree sub- 

 stantially in their testimony if they expect to be 

 credited in the court-room." In like manner, two 

 observers in the field of natural history must in the 

 main agree in their statements of fact if their obser- 

 vations are to have any scientific value. Notwith- 

 standing it is true that we do not aU see the same 

 things when we go to the fields and woods, there is 

 such a thing as accurate seeing, and there is such 

 a thing as inaccurate seeing and reporting. 



By truth in natural history I can mean only that 

 which is verifiable ; that which others may see under 

 like conditions, or which accords with the observa- 

 101 



