202 NATURAL SCIENCE [September 



The present volume contains two parts, the first dealing with the 

 cell and its functions, the second with the Protozoa. In the first part 

 the authors give a review of general cytology, and deal with the vexed 

 questions of protoplasmic and nuclear structures. Here, as they admit, 

 they are often on very controversial ground, and experts would find 

 much to criticise and to dispute in the opinions put forward. It 

 cannot, however, be laid to the charge of our authors that they have 

 neglected or passed over other views, though their criticisms upon 

 them are occasionally perhaps rather one-sided ; for having in view 

 once more the exigencies of the student they have divided the work 

 into two parts, one printed in large type composing the main text, 

 the other in small type contained in the footnotes. In the former 

 the objects are described in a simple and straightforward manner from 

 the point of view taken by the authors, while to the footnotes are 

 relegated the more controversial subjects as well as details concerning 

 the less important or doubtful genera and similar matters. In this 

 way the work is rendered extremely complete, and while on the one 

 hand the student is treated to a clear and continuous, if at times 

 dogmatic, expose of the subject, he is enabled, on the other hand, to 

 greatly extend his knowledge, if he wish, by means of the references 

 and discussions in the footnotes. 



The portion of the work dealing with the Protozoa contains a mass 

 of information which it would be impossible to criticise in detail. We 

 must, however, take exception to one innovation which has been 

 introduced into this work, namely, the manner in which the authors 

 have changed the names of the groups, in the attempt to introduce 

 one uniform system of terminations for the equivalent taxonomic 

 subdivisions. The results have been in some cases almost disastrous ; 

 we can hardly recognise such familiar groups as the Flagellata and 

 Ciliata when we see them written as " Fla^ellia " and " Ciliae " 

 respectively. In science a very good excuse is always necessary 

 before the alteration of well-established names can be permitted. In 

 the present case it is again solicitude for the student which is 

 responsible for this well-meant but, we think, injudicious reform. 

 It is supposed, for instance, that to make the names of classes end in 

 ia, and subclasses in iae, in all cases, will tend to clearness. Not 

 only, however, is this alteration of names rather confusing, especially 

 to the beginner, but it involves the assumption, which can scarcely be 

 maintained, that the various categories known as classes, subclasses, 

 orders, and so forth, are of the same taxonomic value in all groups. 

 The fact alone, however, that in the classifications of different authors, 

 different names are given to equivalent divisions, is a sufficient refuta- 

 tion of this view, for where one author has a subclass divided into 

 orders, another may have an order divided into suborders. It is, 

 therefore, rather premature to coin a uniform termination for sub- 

 classes or orders until the value of these categories is more fixed. 

 But further, Messrs Delage and Herouard have given new names in 

 their scheme to just those taxonomic categories for which, being of 

 lesser and therefore of more definite value, the almost universal custom 

 of naturalists has already established a uniform terminology. Nearly 

 everywhere now names of families are made to terminate in idae and 

 subfamilies in inae ; yet our authors choose to employ the termination 



