120 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OP 



or other constituent groups of the "Kingdom Protozoa,'''' as defined by Pro- 

 fessor Owen. He says: "The word Protozoa, i. e. first or early animals, 

 which was formed by a foreign naturalist, can alone include those that are ad- 

 mitted by all to be animals, or zoa, which are already members of and in- 

 cluded in the kingdom Animalia, and not those concerning which it is doubtful 

 whether they be not rather plants, or phyta." The " Reguum Primigenum," 

 according to Mr. Hogg, contains "all the lower creatures, or the primary or- 

 ganic beings ' Protoctista' both Protophyta, or those considered now by 

 many as lower or primary beings, having more the nature of plants, and Pro- 

 tozoa, or such as are esteemed as lower or primary beings, having rather the 

 nature of animals " He alludes, however, exclusively to the groups men- 

 tioned by Professor Owen, previously cited in this paper as constituting his 

 "Kingdom Protozoa." 



The idea of intermediate groups partaking of the nature of both animals 

 and plants has been very extensively entertained, and from it seems to have 

 originated such terms as Zoophyta, Phytozoa, and others of similar meaning, 

 adopted from ancient authors. Generally, however, in the older authors the 

 allusion is mainly to forma only as intermediate, but there are numerous ex- 

 pressions in the works of naturalists of all times, which show a suspicion that 

 organisms exist which are not to be regarded properly as either animal or 

 vegetable in their structure and nature. The well known expression of Pliny 

 is to this purpose: " Equidem et his inesse sensum abitror, qua? neque ani- 

 malium, neque fructicum, sed tertium quamdam ex utroqne naturam habent : 

 urticis dico etspongiis." (Nat. Hist., Book ix. chap. 68.) This paragraph 

 has attracted much attention. 



The great descriptive and literary naturalist, Buffon, frequently expresses 

 opinions on this subjeet, from which are the following : 



"Mais, comme nous l'avons deja dis plus d'une fois, ces lignes de separa- 

 tion n'existent point dans la Nature, il y a des etres qui ne sont ni animaux, 

 ni vegetaux, ni mineraux, et qu'on tenteroit vainement de rapporter aux 

 uns ou aux autres ;"...." comme on veut absolument que toutetre 

 vivant soit un animal ou une plante, on croiroit n'avoir pas bien connu un 

 etre organise si on ne le rapportoit pas a Tun ou a l'autre de ces noms gener- 

 aux, tandis qu'il doit y avoir, et qu'en effet il y a une grande quantite d'etres 

 organises qui ne sont ni Pun ni l'autre." (Vol. iv. p. 252, Paris, 1776.) 



This celebrated author previously had expressed himself in a manner gen- 

 erally coinciding and consistent with the preceding paragraph. We cite ear- 

 lier passages from the same volume, not only for our present purpose, but in- 

 cidentally, as singularly illustrative of the very small progress on this subject 

 from that time to the present : 



" Cet examen nous conduit a reconnoitre evidemment qu'il n'y aaucune dif- 

 ference absolument essentielle & generale entre les animaux & les vegetaux, 

 mais que la Nature descend par degres & par nuances imperceptibles d'un qui 

 nous paroit le plus parfait a celui qui Pestle moins, & de celui-ciau vegetal." 

 (Vol. iv. p. 8.) 



" On peut done assurer avee plus de fondement encore, que les animaux & 

 les vegetaux sont des etres du meme ordre, & que la Nature semble avoir 

 passe des tins aux autres par des nuances insensibles, puisqu'ils ont entr'eux 

 des ressemblancesessentielles & generales, & qu'ils n'ont aucune difference 

 qu'on puisse regarder comme telle." (Vol. iv. p. 9.) 



The learned Daubenton also has occasional or incidental observations of a 

 similar purport, the following of which is one of the most remarkable : 



" Les polypes, l'acetabule, les animaux des infusions n'ont-ils pas une or- 

 ganisation assez diflvrente de celle de la plupart des animaux pour avoir un 

 autre nom ? Les conserves, les champignons, les moisissures, les lichens 

 sont-ils de vraies plantes ? Je pourrois rapporter ici beaucoup d'autres obser- 

 vations qui tendent a prouver qu'il y a une tres-grande quantite d'etres organ- 



[May, 



