The Pre-Adamite “witness of the deluge” made a great noise in Germany, and no one there dared to dispute the opinion of the Swiss naturalist, under his double authority of theologian and savant. This, probably, is the reason why Gesner in his “Traité des Pétrifactions,” published in 1758, describes with admiration the fossil of Œningen, which he attributes, with Scheuchzer, to the _antediluvian man_. Pierre Camper alone dared to oppose this opinion, which was then universally professed throughout Germany. He went to Œningen in 1787 to examine the celebrated fossil animal; he had no difficulty in detecting the error into which Scheuchzer had fallen. He recognised at once that it was a Reptile; but he deceived himself, nevertheless, as to the family to which it belonged; he took it for a Saurian. “A petrified lizard,” Camper wrote; “could it possibly pass for a man?” It was left to Cuvier to place in its true family the fossil of Œningen; in a memoir on the subject he demonstrated that this skeleton belonged to one of the amphibious batrachians called Salamanders. “Take,” he says in his memoir, “a skeleton of a Salamander and place it alongside the fossil, without allowing yourself to be misled by the difference of size, just as you could easily do in comparing a drawing of the salamander of the natural size with one of the fossil reduced to a sixteenth part of its dimensions, and everything will be explained in the clearest manner.” “I am even persuaded,” adds the great naturalist, in a subsequent edition of this memoir, “that, if we could re-arrange the fossil and look closer into the details, we should find still more numerous proofs in the articular faces of the vertebræ, in those of the jaws, in the vestiges of very small teeth, and even in the labyrinth of the ear.” And he invited the proprietors or depositaries of the precious fossil to proceed to such an examination. Cuvier had the gratification of making, personally, the investigation he suggested. Finding himself at Haarlem, he asked permission of the Director of the Museum to examine the stone which contained the supposed fossil man. The operation was carried on in the presence of the director and another naturalist. A drawing of the skeleton of a Salamander was placed near the fossil by Cuvier, who had the satisfaction of recognising, as the stone was chipped away under the chisel, each of the bones, announced by the drawing, as they made their appearance. In the natural sciences there are few instances of such triumphant results--few demonstrations so satisfactory as this, of the certitude of the methods of observation and induction on which palæontology is based. * * * * *