I say, for the most part; for there were already even 

 at that time a few clear-sighted naturalists (Wigand, 

 Naegeli, Koelliker and others) who saw plainly the residue 

 of truth that would result from the discussion. But to the 

 overwhelming majority, the alternatives seemed to be: 

 Either Darwinism or no evolution at all. Today, however, 

 the state of things is considerably altered. The doctrine 

 of Descent is clearly and definitely distinguished from 

 Darwinism' at least by the majority of naturalists. It is 

 therefore of the utmost importance that this luminous dis- 

 tinction should likewise become recognized in lay circles. 



My object in these pages is to show that Darwinism 

 will soon be a thing of the past, a matter of history; that 

 we even now stand at its death-bed, while its friends are 

 solicitous only to secure for it a decent burial. 



Out of the chaos of controversy which has obtained 

 during the last four decades there has emerged an ele- 

 ment of truth — for there lurks a germ of truth in most 

 errors — which has gained almost universal recognition 

 among contemporary men of science, namely, the doctrine 

 of Descent. The fact that living organisms form an ascend- 

 ing series from the less perfect to the more perfect; the 

 further fact that they also form a series according as they 

 display more or less homology of structure and are formed 

 according to similar types; and, lastly, that the fossil re- 

 mains of organisms found in the various strata of the 

 earth's surface likewise represent an ascending series from 

 the simple to the more complex — ^these three facts suggest- 

 ed to naturalists the thought that living organisms were 



28 



