Bisbee daily review., 1919-09-14

Corfu, the Adriatic, and Brittany. In 1881 he went to Ceylon, in 1887 to Palestine, in 1897 to Russia, and in 1900 to Singapore, Java, and Suma, tra. He wrote three volumes of travel, in which personal expert ences and botanical, geological and anthropological observations were well described and pleasantly ming led.
 Haeckel was a clever artist with brush and pencil and he brought back from his travels a series of landscapes of considerable technical merit This talent he applied eX- tensively to his work in systematic zoology. The memoirs to which re- ference has already been made and his four great contributions to the H. M. S. Challenger Reports-"Deep Sea Medusae" QSS2), "Radiolaria" (SSO, "Siphonophora" QSSS), and Deep Sea Keratosa", (1SS9)-were superbly illustrated with colored and uneolored drawings
 This facility improved the appear ance rather than the value of his work. It was his habit to complete
 
 from these rather than from the actual specimens and dissections. He was not infrequently misled by the tendency to schematize and to gen. eralize which he had crystalized in artistic rather ttan scientific inter- pretation.
 Convert to Drawinism.
 Haeckel was one of the first of the German converts to Drawinism. He read the Origin of Specie" in 1860. The doctrine at once took shape in his mind as an infallible major proposition from which all the facts concerning the bodies of animals aAd plants and the minds of animals and man could be de- duced as clear cut laws. It was an attitude totally different from that of the cautious Darwin, who worked by induction.
 Haeckel had a shorter way with facts and with difficulties. He avoided them or denied them or in- vented more convenient substitutes He hailed Darwin as the Copernicus of the organic world. Astronomers, following Copernicus and Kepler and Newton, predicted the existence of planets to explain perturbations; and the planets were generally found. Haeckel with equal certain ty predicted. drew and described hypothetical animals to fill the gaps which he found in his scheme of descent. Unfortunately none of his hypothetical animals were discover ed. In the progress of knowledge the fault has generally proved to be not with the Darwinian theory, but with HaeckePs schematic and dog matic interpretation of it.
 None the less, Haeckel achieved a great and in many Nways a just reputation as a brilliant popular ex- positor of evolution. The doctrine had to be driven into the resistant heads of mankind against a preju- diced opposition often as schematic His General Morphology of Organ isms" (1S66), Natural History of creation" QS6S), ''The Last Link QS9S), and the Riddle of the Uni verse" Q901) were translated into many languages. Their simplicity and directness, and the prophetic assurance with which the doctrines were presented as the whole truth, gained for them popularity that a more scientific spirit would have missed.
 On Religious Problems.
 Haeckel, like Huxley, passed from to philosophy, ands from philosophy ~ ;rrsxN h lens. Huxley addressed his tech nical works to scientific specialists, his more general essays and pre- sentiment of Darwinism to the geu- eral public, but his discussions of philosophy and of religion were nev- CT in the form of propaganda ad- dressed to the ignorant.
 Haeckel was as dogmatic certain of the nature of God, free will, good and evil, as he was of the shape of a jellyfish, and described them as positively Put Huxley, at least in his later writings, did not jar on minds accustomed to controversy even on grave themes. Haeckel be- came the tubtffumper of what ap- peared crude atheism, and by his methods acquired an obnoxious re- putation which his actual views hardly deserved.
 If Haeckel had died ten years ago he would have had a more hon. orable place in English memory. Since then two events have taken place. The progress of exact scien tific work discovered many flaws in his work, which he neither recog- nized nor attempted to correct. And his attitude in the war shocked most of his large circle of English admirers and friends. He was one of the signatories of the notorious letter issued in October, 1914, in which ninety-three leaders of Ger man science and German thought proclaimed the German cause in it's most aggressive form, denied the Belgian atrocities, and defended their kultur and militarism.
 Never word came from him in protest against any of the success sive crimes of Germany, and in let