312 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY. 



value, seeing that they gave details of interna] structure in opaque 

 microscopic organisms without in any way damaging the shells. 



Mr. Thomas H. Hiscott suggested that it, would be of interest to 

 hear what Mr. Earland had to say upon such highly controversial 

 matters. 



Mr. Earland replied that he was sure the Meeting would not wish 

 him at that hour to enter into a discussion with his colleague, on a 

 subject which they had debated for several years, beyond saying that 

 he had not in any way altered his own views on Plastogamy since he 

 wrote some brief remarks on the subject in 11)05 in the Journal of the 

 Quekett Microscopical Club. 



That there were instances of "associated" pairs was unquestionaMv 

 true ; but how was one to distinguish " associated " pairs from plastogamic 

 pairs when they had nothing but dead shells to work on ? That was a 

 point which neither he nor his colleague, nor anyone else, was in a 

 position to decide. 



As regards the question of Skiagraphy applied to the study of the 

 Foraminifera he was not impressed with the belief that it would lead to 

 new^ discoveries of structure, and on this point he differed greatly from 

 his colleague, who was an optimist. He himself was content to accept the 

 remarkable results obtained by Mr. Barnard without building any hopes 

 on a further advance, and, whilst appreciating the results, failed to see 

 how any great advance upon what had been done up to the present was 

 to be obtained until physical laws were altered. It was simply going 

 back to the old days of deep eye-pieces, as there was no increase in 

 aperture. He failed to see how the optimistic expectations based on 

 Mr. Barnard's work were to be justified, although no one would be more 

 pleased than himself if these hopes were fulfilled. As the process stood 

 at present it answered splendidly for the larger forms, although even 

 here it broke down over the microspheric types, because the minute and 

 numerous early chambers would not stand the magnification of the image 

 on the negative. With the smaller species the process at present broke 

 down absolutely, for the same reason. 



Mr. Barnard regretted that he was at a great disadvantage as he 

 had only heard the concluding portions of Mr. Earland's remarks, but 

 he believed that Mr. Earland failed to appreciate the point of view 

 from which he had taken up his work with X-rays. Mr. Earland w r as 

 evidently under the impression that the sole aim and object was to 

 obtain radiographs of Foraminifera, but this was a mere incident in the 

 work. He absolutely disclaimed any intention whatever to regard 

 these results as final — they could hardly be considered even a step in the 

 process which he had in view — so that it was not quite fair to pass 

 judgment upon the subject, and he (Mr. Barnard) thought that what 

 he had said previously should be recalled to mind. Since the meeting 

 at which he showed his photographs he had done further work, which 

 was not without promise, but he was unable to go further than this at 

 present. 



Mr. Earland was correct in saying there was not increase in resolution 

 by the method of using X-rays of which the results shown were examples. 

 The whole point was that if it became possible to utilize radiations of 



