Schmidt's range; he waives the demand for a direct reply, 

 for instance, in the following amusing way (p. 28): "Two 

 reasons, however, prevent me from being more explicit: 

 In the first place I do not like to dispute with people who 

 adduce variant readings and church-fathers as proofs and 

 can still remain serious. In the second place I would not 

 like to fall into the hands of a Loofs." In this manner it is 

 indeed easy to evade an argument, which for good reasons 

 one is not able to pursue. Loofs' criticism is so serious 

 and destructive that it should be of the utmost concern to 

 Haeckel's friends to refute it. Since they are unable to do 

 so, they content themselves with references to Loofs' caus- 

 tic style, which he should indeed have avoided. There are, 

 nevertheless, cases in which one must employ trenchant 

 phraseology, and Haeckel himself has given an occasion 

 for it; a dignified style is simply out of the question in his 

 case. Haeckel extricated himself with even greater ease, 

 by declaring that he had "neither time nor inclination" for 

 reply, and that a mutual understanding with Loofs was im- 

 possible because their scientific views were entirely differ- 

 ent. Could anything be more suggestive of the words of 

 Mephistopheles : 



"But in each word must be a thought — 

 There is, — or we may so assume, — 

 Not always found, nor always sought. 

 While words — mere words supply its room. 



Words answer wel 1, when men enlist 'em. 

 In building up a favorite system." 



There are two other points in Schmidt's book that are 



of interest to us. The first of these is the manner in which 



112 



