438 Linncean Society : — 



Upon examining Dr. Kaup's Psaris fraseri, of the Proc. Zool. Soc. 

 1851, p. 47, I found it the same as Tityra albitorques^ Du Bus, 

 Bull. Ac. Brux. 1847, xiv. pt. 2. p. 104 ; and his Psaris parinus, 

 ib. p. 48, seems to me very closely allied to, if not identical with, 

 Pachyramphus atricapillus (Gm.), PI. Enl. 687. fig. 1. 



I can also confirm what Dr. Hartlaub has said in Wiegmann's 

 Archiv, 1854, that Todirostrum pectorale, Kp., of the same paper 

 is T. granadense, Hartl., T. ruficeps, Kp. = r. multicolor^ Strickl., 

 and Setophaga Jlammea, Kp. = ^S*. intermedia, Hartl. R. Z. 1853, 

 p. 5. But in the two latter cases Dr. Kaup's names were first given, 

 though from the long delay in publishing the Proceedings the others 

 were first published. 



When criticising other writers, it is proper also to mention my own 

 mistakes ; and I take this opportunity therefore of stating, that my 

 Tcenioptera striaticollis of the Proc. Zool. Soc. 1851, p. 193 (of which 

 the Derby Museum contains examples), has been long ago named 

 and figured in D'Orbigny*s Voyage as Tyrannus rufiventrisy p. 312, 

 pi. 32. fig. 2. 



LINNiEAN SOCIETY. 



March 4, 1856. — The President in the Chair. 

 The following papers were read : — 



1. "Note on some Larvae voided by Children," by Mr. E. New- 

 man. 



2. "Notice on the occurrence of Sepia biserialis in Cornwall,*' by 

 J. Couch, Esq. 



3. "A Memoir on the Development of the Ovule of Santalum 

 albumy with some Remarks on the Phsenomena of Impregnation in 

 Plants generally," by Prof. Henfrey. 



The observations detailed in this memoir were undertaken with the 

 object of confirming Mr. Henfrey's views on this subject, as detailed in 

 the 21st volume of the Society's Transactions, which views coincide 

 generally with those of Amici, Von Mohl, Miiller, Hofmeister, and 

 Tulasne, and are in opposition to those of Schleiden and Schacht. Even 

 among the disciples of Amici, however, a certain degree of discrepancy 

 exists in regard to the origin of the germinal vesicle, as to whether it 

 exists before, or is formed after fecundation. Hofmeister says before. 

 Tulasne states that he never could find it anterior to the fertilization ; 

 though, he adds, "this delicate question no longer (1849) possesses 

 all the interest which was accorded to it by MM. Mirbel and Bron- 

 gniart, and more recently by Mr. Henfrey. It is true the existence 

 of the embryonary vesicle at a period anterior to the arrival of the 

 pollen-tube would, if placed beyond doubt, prove invincibly that this 

 vesicle could not owe its origin to the latter organ : even now that 

 the error of the pollinists is no longer uncertain, the question seems 

 worthy of attention, especially on account of the theoretical conse- 

 quences involved.'* Confidently as Tulasne expressed himself as to 

 the origin of the germinal vesicle independently of the apex of the 

 pollen-tube, this very point is most warmly contested by Schacht. 



