was then at Erlangen (died in Muenster 1902). He had 

 previously written a number of scientific works from the 

 standpoint of the Descent theory. In the year 1891, in- 

 vestigations regarding rodents led him to oppose that the- 

 ory. During the winter term of 1891-92 he gave evidence 

 of this change in a public lecture. Not until 1895 was there 

 question of his appointment to the chair of zoology in Er- 

 langen. In 1898 he published a Manual of Zoology based 

 on principles radically opposed to the doctrine of Descent. 

 This manual irritated Haeckel so much that he issued one 

 of his well-known articles, Ascending and Descending Zool- 

 ogy, in which, after his usual manner, he casts suspicion on 

 Fleischmann of having received his appointment to the 

 chair at Erlangen by becoming an anti-Darwinian in ac- 

 cordance with a desire expressed at the diet of Bavaria. I 

 am not aware that Haeckel has paid any attention to the 

 work of Fleischmann which we have just reviewed. 



By its publication, however, the author disturbed a 

 hornet's nest. Dispassionate, but still entirely adverse is 

 Professor Plate's review in the "Biologisches Zentralblatt," 

 while the "Umschau" publishes two criticisms, one by Pro- 

 fessor von Wagner, the other by Dr. Reh, which for want 

 of sense could not well be equalled. It was the former who 

 furnished material for our sixth chapter and who there dis- 

 played such utter confusion of thought regarding the in- 

 ductive method. The same confusion is apparent in his 

 recent utterance in which he observes that Fleischmann's 

 whole aim is to accumulate observational data, meanwhile 

 avoiding speculation as far as possible. His criticism is re- 



134 



