1898] SOME NEW BOOKS 427 



to send to Germany for klinostats and polar planimeters any more 

 than for platinum crucibles and india-rubber tubing. 



The translator has done his work excellently, and we are but 

 rarely reminded of the German original. We note, however, a few 

 errors. The English of ' plasmolytische gemacht ' is ' plasmolysed,' 

 not 'rendered plasmolytic ' (p. 145). On p. 43, 1. 19, 'layer' would 

 be intelligible while ' meniscus ' is not, though the German is 

 ' Meniscus.' On p. 424, 1. 16, ' favourable ' is found where ' un- 

 favourable ' is meant. 



The abundant matter of this compendious book is conveniently 

 arranged, and the translation of it will be welcomed by the propor- 

 tionally increasing number of those among even serious botanical 

 students, who are unable to use such a work in the original. 



The Organism as Unit 



Problems of Biology. By George Sandenian. 8vo, pp. viii + 213. London : 



Swan Sonnenschein. 1896. 

 The Liyixg Organism : An Introduction to the Problems of Biology. By Alfred 



Earl. 8vo, pp. xiv + 272. London : Macmillan & Co. 1898. Price 6s. 



These two books appear to have similar aims and to arrive at much 

 the same ultimate conclusion, or absence of conclusion, and yet they 

 stand in strong contrast to each other. Mr Earl's book is nicely 

 printed and bound ; it is written in an easy style, has all the clear- 

 ness that can be imparted by division into chapters with many sub- 

 divisions and running headlines, uses italics where appropriate, and 

 is furnished with a full table of contents and with an index. Mr 

 Sandeman's book is needlessly repellent in type and binding ; its 

 style has an individuality that is strongly marked, but far from 

 attractive or lucid ; the chapters and the paragraphs are of weary- 

 ing length ; there is no analysis of contents, and no index. Never- 

 theless, we set Mr Sandeman's book above Mr Earl's : it is more 

 interesting, more critical, and more suggestive. If the author 

 would rewrite it with more feeling for the dulness of his readers, 

 if he would be guided by the example of Mr Earl, and if he 

 would temper his biological erudition to the ignorance of the 

 philosopher, his philosophical jargon to the simplicity of the 

 biologist, we should recommend both parties to read his second 

 edition. We dare not recommend the perusal of the first, except 

 to those superior beings who have mastered " Sordello " and 

 " Bygmester Solness." 



For both of these writers a theory of the unity of the organism 

 forms the chief object of biological enquiry. Each of them is at pains 

 to tell us in what this unity does not consist; but, as is natural, 

 neither of them can formulate a clear conception of what it is. Mr 

 Earl lays stress on the impossibility of conceiving the organism apart 

 from its environment ; they may be expressed in terms of subject 

 and object, and constitute " a dual manifestation of a single reality." 

 Mr Sandenian dallies with ' feeling' as that which gives unity to the 

 organism, but presently rejects it and falls back on the barren con- 

 ception of 'character,' which, he says, "is the identity in difference 



