160 The Scottish Naturalist. 



It may be that to some of our readers what has been said may 

 seem needless, or even hurtful, as tending to discourage many that 

 would wish to be liberal donors, but who would shrink from offer- 

 ing what may be refused by the directors of museums managed on 

 such principles. But there is little risk of a result prejudicial to 

 the best interests of the institutions ; while it would be a very great 

 advantage to be free from the burden of accumulations of material 

 useless at the best, and even injurious as interfering with the effi- 

 cient fulfilment of the chief uses of the museums to the districts, to 

 the scientific public, and most of all to Societies that undertake 

 the work of forming: them. 



THE KELATIONSHIP OP PALAEONTOLOGY TO BIOLOGY. 



By R J. HARVEY GIBSON, M.A. 



( Concluded. ) 



I HOLD then that Palaeontology is a branch of Biology, and 

 not a subdivision of Geology. I hold that a discussion of 

 the structure, affinities, classification, and distribution in time of 

 fossils is a biological problem, not a geological one. I would 

 even go the length of advocating the abolition of the term 

 Palaeontology, since its use is calculated to emphasise the separa- 

 tion of the study of fossils from the study of recent forms, a 

 separation that should not exist. 



How, then, is Biology to be arranged so as to include this new 

 mass of material ? Simply enough. By the admission of the 

 essentially genealogical nature of classification, and the introduc- 

 tion into that classification of the different groups of plants and 

 animals that lived in past ages. If the doctrine of Evolution be 

 true, if all living forms be descended from common ancestors, 

 then all ancient forms must be entitled to a place in a biological 

 classification. That many such forms will for long remain in a 

 doubtful relation to the general tree is a misfortune, due to circum- 

 stances beyond our control. But that need not hinder us from 

 attempting such a classification. It does not do so even in the 

 present state of Zoological knowledge ; though there are many 

 forms whose nearest relationships have not as yet been definitely 

 decided upon. 



We shall be unable, it is true, to give an account of the soft 



