s.

The most striking feature of the black-and-yellow grosbeak, and that
on which I wish particularly to dwell, is the extraordinary
resemblance that the cock bird bears to the cock black-headed oriole.
If this extended to the hen, and if the grosbeak were parasitic on
the oriole, it would be held up as an example of mimicry. We should
be told that owing to its resemblance to its dupe it was able to
approach the nest without raising any suspicion and deposit its egg.
But the grosbeak is not parasitic on the oriole, and it is the cock
and not the hen that bears the resemblance; moreover, the black-headed
oriole does not occur in the Himalayas, so that neither the grosbeak
nor the oriole can possibly derive any benefit from this resemblance.

Now, cabinet zoologists are never tired of writing about mimicry.
They assert that when organisms belonging to different families bear
a close external resemblance, this resemblance has been brought about
by natural selection. Having made this assertion, they expend reams
of paper in demonstrating how one or both of the species benefits
by the resemblance.

However, scientific books make no mention of the resemblance between
the oriole and the grosbeak. The reason for this is, of course, that
the resemblance in this instance cannot be a case of mimicry. Now,
I regret to have to say that men of science take up the same attitude
towards their theories as lawyers do regarding the cases they argue
in Courts of Justice. There would be no harm in taking up this attitude
if men of science were to explain that they are acting the part of
advocates, that they are fighting for a theory, and trying to persuade
the world to accept this theory. It is because they masquerade as
judges, and put forward a one-sided case as a matured judicial finding,
that I take exception to their methods.

The trouble is that scientific men to-day form a brotherhood, a
hierarchy, which lays claim to infallibility, or rather tacitly
assumes infallibility.

They form a league into which none are admitted except those who take
the oath of allegiance; and, of course, to expose the weakness of
the scientific doctrines of the time is equivalent to violating the
oath of allegiance. Now, the man of science who has to earn his living
by his science, has either to join the league or run the risk of
starving. This explains how a small coterie of men has things very
much its own way; how it can lay down the law without f